Case 4105170/2016 · Employment Tribunal

69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Nos: S/4105170/2016 Mr J Petchey v Represented by: Thompsons Solicitors The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc — 2017

Case reference: 4105170/2016
Decision date: 13 March 2017
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judge: Employment Judge James Hendry

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Nos: S/4105170/2016 Mr J Petchey

Respondent

Represented by: Thompsons Solicitors The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal recorded that the claim had been withdrawn by the claimant and was therefore dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. No substantive findings on liability were recorded in the extracted judgment text.

The extracted text does not specify the underlying causes of action, any factual findings on the merits, or any monetary award. The only named outcome is dismissal following withdrawal, with the judgment dated 13 March 2017 and entered in the register on the same date.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	The judgment records that the claim had been withdrawn by the claimant and was dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The extracted text does not identify the substantive heads of claim.	Withdrawn	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.