Case 4105687/2016 · Employment Tribunal
69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105687/2016 Mr E Nwogu v Represented by: Mr E Obi Deux Consulting Ltd ABB Limited — 2017
- Case reference
- 4105687/2016
- Decision date
- 31 March 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McFatridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
69(scot) claim dismissed on withdrawal rule EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105687/2016 Mr E Nwogu
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records only that Mr E Nwogu's claim was withdrawn by the claimant. It does not set out any substantive findings on the pleaded allegations.
Employment Judge Ian McFatridge recorded that, because the claim had been withdrawn, it was dismissed under Rule 52 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.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 is dated 31 March 2017 and was entered in the register and copied to the parties on the same date.
No remedy, liability analysis, or legal test beyond Rule 52 is stated in the extracted judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment records that the claim was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. No substantive claim findings are set out in the extracted text. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 52 of 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.