Case 4105166/2016 · Employment Tribunal
69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Nos: 4105166/2016 Mrs L Eccles v Health Board — 2017
- Case reference
- 4105166/2016
- Decision date
- 28 June 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McFatridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Nos: 4105166/2016 Mrs L Eccles
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment records a procedural disposal rather than any merits determination. In case 4105166/2016, Mrs L Eccles was the claimant and Tayside Health Board was the respondent. The employment judge was Ian McFatridge, and the judgment was entered on 28 June 2017.
The tribunal states that the claim had been withdrawn by the claimant and was therefore dismissed under Rule 52 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The judgment does not set out findings of fact on the underlying dispute and does not determine the substance of any pleaded claims.
No award of compensation or other remedy is recorded in the judgment. The available text does not identify any split between causes of action or any substantive legal test applied beyond the Rule 52 disposal on withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the substantive causes of action. It records only that the claimant withdrew the claim and that it was dismissed under Rule 52 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 52 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.