Case 4107541/2017 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4107541/2017 Mr P Gray v Living Ambitions Limited — 2018
- Case reference
- 4107541/2017
- Decision date
- 29 March 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Garvie
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4107541/2017 Mr P Gray
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr P Gray's claim against Living Ambitions Limited was withdrawn by the claimant. Employment Judge Garvie dismissed it under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 in a judgment dated 29 March 2018.
The extracted judgment records no findings on liability, no separate treatment of the underlying heads of claim in the text provided, and no monetary award or other remedy.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment records that the claim was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52. The extracted text does not separate the heads of claim, so this outcome is recorded using the case-context claim type. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the claim was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52. The extracted text does not separate the heads of claim, so this outcome is recorded using the case-context claim type. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 52
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.