Case 4107189/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Diane McMaster v - Employment Representative Raeburn Drilling and Geotechnical Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 4107189/2023
- Decision date
- 6 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell Bradley
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Diane McMaster
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 1 February 2024, the claimant withdrew her claims for notice pay, holiday pay, and arrears of pay. The tribunal recorded that those claims were dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because they had been withdrawn by the claimant at the hearing.
The judgment identifies the notice pay claim, the holiday pay claim, and the arrears of pay claim as having been brought under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the Working Time Regulations 1998, and the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (Scotland) Order 1994. No liability findings were made and no monetary award was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim; dismissed under Rule 52 after being withdrawn at the hearing. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim withdrawn at the hearing and dismissed under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Arrears of pay claim, brought under Part II ERA 1996, the Working Time Regulations 1998 or the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (Scotland) Order 1994; withdrawn at the hearing and dismissed under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.