Case 4105557/2016 · Employment Tribunal

69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105557/2016 Mr M Glennie v Represented by: Mr G Probert Counsel Adecco UK Ltd and 1 other — 2017

Case reference: 4105557/2016
Decision date: 1 June 2017
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judge: Employment Judge Nicol

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

3 named

Claimant

69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105557/2016 Mr M Glennie

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The judgment records that the claim against the second respondent, Eli Lily & Company Ltd, had been withdrawn by the claimant. The tribunal therefore dismissed that claim under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. No merits findings are set out in the text supplied.

The decision is signed by Employment Judge Nicol, dated 31 May 2017, and entered in the register and copied to the parties on 1 June 2017. The extracted judgment does not identify any separate remedy, liability analysis, or panel members.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	The judgment states that the claim against the second respondent, Eli Lily & Company Ltd, had been withdrawn by the claimant and was dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.	Dismissed	—	—

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.

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.