Case 4104293/2018 · Employment Tribunal
E.T. Z (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4104293/2018 Held in Glasgow on November 201810 Employment Judge: J D Young Ms Karleen Burke
A preliminary hearing was held on the respondent’s application to strike out the claim under Rule 37(1)(b) and on the effect of the claimant’s non-compliance with the Tribunal’s Unless Order of 10 July 2018. The Employment Judge held that there had been non-compliance with that order, and the claim so far as it related to an alleged detriment under section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was dismissed by reason of that non-compliance.
The respondent’s application to strike out the whole claim was refused. The Tribunal recorded that, after the dismissal of the section 47B detriment claim, the claimant’s remaining claims were dismissal by reason of protected disclosures, ordinary unfair dismissal, and unlawful deduction of wages said to arise from non-payment of notice pay.
The Tribunal then made case management orders requiring the respondent to produce the claimant’s personnel file and relevant emails, and requiring the claimant to provide further and better particulars and a schedule of loss. No compensation or other monetary remedy was assessed in this judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Dismissed only so far as it related to an alleged detriment under s.47B ERA 1996 because of non-compliance with the Unless Order made on 10 July 2018; this was a procedural dismissal, not a merits decision. | Dismissed | — | — |
The 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.