Case 4103720/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr David Bruce v Energy Assets Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 4103720/2022
- Decision date
- 22 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge McFatridge
- Venue
- Dundee
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr David Bruce
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in Dundee on 22 November 2022, the tribunal refused the respondent's application to strike out the claim under rule 47, which had been based on the claimant's failure to attend preliminary hearings on 26 September and 1 November 2022. The tribunal also refused the respondent's rule 37 strike-out application for no reasonable prospect of success, following the respondent indicating that it was no longer insisting on that application.
The claimant's race discrimination claim had been withdrawn and was dismissed in terms of rule 52. The tribunal made a rule 39 deposit order requiring the claimant to pay £50 each as a pre-condition to pursuing the unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims. No substantive findings on liability were made at this hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The respondent's rule 47 strike-out application based on non-attendance was refused, and the rule 39 deposit order required the claimant to pay £50 as a pre-condition to pursuing this claim. No merits determination was made at this hearing. | Other | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The respondent's rule 47 strike-out application based on non-attendance was refused, and the rule 39 deposit order required the claimant to pay £50 as a pre-condition to pursuing this claim. No merits determination was made at this hearing. | Other | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The claimant's race discrimination claim had been withdrawn and was dismissed in terms of rule 52. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- rule 47
- rule 37
- rule 39
- rule 52
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.