Case 4107943/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Ferguson v Scottish Water Business Stream Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 4107943/2021
- Decision date
- 30 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Kemp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Ferguson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge A Kemp heard the final hearing remotely on 29 and 30 June 2021. The judgment records that the claims made did not succeed and that the claim was dismissed.
The extracted text does not set out any separate liability findings, legal analysis, or remedy award. It states that reasons were given orally.
The record also states that no written reasons would be provided unless either party asked for them within 14 days of the written record being sent to the parties, under Rule 62(3).
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The extracted judgment text only states that the claims did not succeed and that the claim was dismissed; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The extracted judgment text only states that the claims did not succeed and that the claim was dismissed; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The extracted judgment text only states that the claims did not succeed and that the claim was dismissed; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The extracted judgment text only states that the claims did not succeed and that the claim was dismissed; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The extracted judgment text only states that the claims did not succeed and that the claim was dismissed; this claim type is taken from the case listing context. | 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.