Case 4116778/2018 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4116778/2018 Mr G Shewan v Balfour Beatty Group Employment Limited — 2018
- Case reference
- 4116778/2018
- Decision date
- 28 November 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge J Garvie
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4116778/2018 Mr G Shewan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that Mr G Shewan brought a claim against Balfour Beatty Group Employment Limited. The listing categories identify the claims as breach of contract and unfair dismissal.
The tribunal did not determine the substantive merits. It recorded that the claim had been withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed it under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The gov.uk listing categories identify breach of contract, and the judgment states that the claim was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The gov.uk listing categories identify unfair dismissal, and the judgment states that the claim was withdrawn by the claimant and dismissed under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 52 of the Rules contained in Schedule 1 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.