Case 4105211/2016 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105211/2016, 4105212/2016, 4105213/2016 & 4105214/2016 Mr D Templeton v The Rangers Football Club Limited — 2017
- Case reference
- 4105211/2016
- Decision date
- 28 March 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M. Kearns Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105211/2016, 4105212/2016, 4105213/2016 & 4105214/2016 Mr D Templeton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment covers four linked cases brought by Mr D Templeton, Mr N Law, Mr N Clark and Mr D Shields against The Rangers Football Club Ltd. The tribunal recorded that the claims had been withdrawn by the claimants.
Employment Judge M. Kearns therefore dismissed the claims under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The judgment is dated 27 March 2017 and was entered in the register and copied to the parties on 28 March 2017.
The judgment contains no findings on the substantive merits of the claims and records no monetary award or other remedy.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Case 4105211/2016; Mr D Templeton. The claim was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Case 4105212/2016; Mr N Law. The claim was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Case 4105213/2016; Mr N Clark. The claim was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Case 4105214/2016; Mr D Shields. The claim was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.