Case 4106684/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Sharon Davis v W H Malcolm Limited st and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 4106684/2020
- Decision date
- 8 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms Sharon Davis
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 1 February 2021, the claimant's representative withdrew the complaints against the second respondents. The tribunal recorded that it was accepted the claimant was employed by the first respondents at all relevant times and that they were the proper respondents for the proceedings.
The tribunal therefore dismissed the claim against the second respondents under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals Rules and, under Rule 34, removed them as wrongly included. The judgment does not determine any substantive liability issue or any remedy.
The claim against the first respondents, W H Malcolm Ltd, was left to continue unaffected, and the heads of complaint in that claim were to proceed to a final hearing as separately ordered by the tribunal.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | At the preliminary hearing on 1 February 2021, the claimant's representative withdrew the complaints against the second respondents. The tribunal dismissed the claim against the second respondents under Rule 52 and removed them under Rule 34 as wrongly included, on the basis that the claimant was employed by the first respondents at all relevant times. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.