Case 4107173/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Ashton Building Systems (Scotland) Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 4107173/2019
- Decision date
- 28 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S MacLean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant did not appear or become represented at the hearing, and the respondent also did not appear and had not lodged an ET3 response. The clerk contacted the claimant's representative and was told that the matter had settled.
The tribunal recorded an email sent on 12 August 2019 withdrawing a claim in case number 4107121/2019, and stated that it understood the present case to be a duplicate claim. In those circumstances, the tribunal considered it appropriate to dismiss the claim under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
No compensation or other monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The tribunal did not specify the underlying cause of action in the extracted text. It dismissed the claim under rule 47 after there was no appearance by either party, no ET3 response, and the clerk had been told the matter had settled. The tribunal also noted an email withdrawing claim number 4107121/2019 and understood this case to be a duplicate claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 47 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.