Case 4105643/2016 · Employment Tribunal

69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105643/2016 Miss C Davie v Represented by: Mr D Devine Solicitor University of St Andrews — 2017

Case reference: 4105643/2016
Decision date: 15 March 2017
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judge: Employment Judge Ian McFatridge

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105643/2016 Miss C Davie

Respondent

Represented by: Mr D Devine Solicitor University of St Andrews

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Miss C Davie brought proceedings against the University of St Andrews. The only substantive disposal recorded in the judgment is that the claim had been withdrawn by the claimant.

Employment Judge Ian McFatridge recorded that, because the claim had been withdrawn, it was dismissed under Rule 52 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The judgment does not contain any findings on the merits of the underlying dispute.

No remedy was awarded and the judgment records no monetary figures.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	The judgment states that the claim had been withdrawn by the claimant and was dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.	Withdrawn	—	—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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.