Case 4107152/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Picton v No written submissions Mr Michael Gallagher — 2021
- Case reference
- 4107152/2019
- Decision date
- 3 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Wiseman
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Picton
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr M Picton’s claim, presented on 29 May 2019, alleged disability discrimination and unauthorised deductions from wages. A preliminary hearing on 18 January 2021 determined that he was an employee of Mr Michael Gallagher, trading as Signs of the Times, and a judgment dated 1 February 2021 was issued on that preliminary issue. This judgment dealt only with the respondent’s application to reconsider that employee-status decision.
The respondent said the tribunal should not have proceeded because Mr Russo was unwell and his partner later telephoned and emailed the tribunal on 18 January 2021. Employment Judge Wiseman accepted the explanation of illness but noted that there was no medical evidence, that contact was not made before lunchtime, and that the reason why Mr Russo or Mr Ram could not have alerted the tribunal earlier was not explained. Applying the rule 70 interests-of-justice test, the tribunal confirmed the 1 February 2021 judgment. The case was to proceed to a further hearing on the remaining issues.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Reconsideration application of the 1 February 2021 employee-status judgment; the tribunal refused to vary or revoke that decision and confirmed it. No substantive merits claim was determined in this judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 70 interests of justice
- Khan v Heywood & Middleton Primary Care Trust
- Campbell v OCS Group UK Ltd & Anor
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.