Case 4111669/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Hunter v Muller UK & Ireland Group LLP T/a Muller Milk & Ingredients — 2022
- Case reference
- 4111669/2021
- Decision date
- 9 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Sangster
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Hunter
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard by Employment Judge M Sangster sitting by CVP on 6 June 2022. The written judgment records oral reasons having been given at the hearing and sets out only procedural disposals of the remaining claims.
The claimant’s complaint of victimisation was struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure. The judgment does not record any substantive findings on the merits of that complaint.
The claimant’s complaint of indirect age discrimination was recorded as having been withdrawn by the claimant and was dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure. No remedy was awarded. The judgment was entered in the register on 9 June 2022.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | The tribunal struck out the claimant’s complaint under Rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure. | Struck out | — | — |
| Age discrimination | The complaint of indirect age discrimination had been withdrawn by the claimant and was dismissed under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure. | Dismissed | Age | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37(1)(a) ET Rules of Procedure
- Rule 52 ET Rules of Procedure
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.