Case 4118415/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Kathleen O’Kane v Represented by:- Ms Morag Dalziel – Solicitor Greater Glasgow Health Board — 2020
- Case reference
- 4118415/2018
- Decision date
- 9 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge I McPherson
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Kathleen O’Kane
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a case management preliminary hearing in Glasgow on 7 January 2020 before Employment Judge I McPherson, the tribunal dealt with a complaint under section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 alleging detriment for having made a protected disclosure. The claimant had withdrawn that complaint by email from her solicitor on 23 December 2019 when providing further and better particulars.
Following that withdrawal, and on the respondents' unopposed application under Rule 52, the tribunal dismissed that part of the claim. No monetary remedy was awarded in this judgment.
The judgment also records that the remaining complaints were unlawful disability discrimination claims under sections 13, 15, 19, 20 and 27 of the Equality Act 2010, including direct discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, indirect discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments and harassment. Those claims were not withdrawn and were to proceed to a public preliminary hearing on disability status before an Employment Judge sitting alone on 1 and 2 April 2020.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The claimant withdrew the section 47B ERA 1996 protected disclosure detriment complaint by email from her solicitor on 23 December 2019. The tribunal then dismissed that part of the claim on the respondents' unopposed application under Rule 52. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 51
- Rule 52
- section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996
- sections 13, 15, 19, 20 and 27 Equality Act 2010
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.