Case 2500573/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S McColl v Mark Swatts Morse LLP — 2024
- Case reference
- 2500573/2024
- Decision date
- 18 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Loy
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S McColl
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard by Employment Judge Loy sitting alone at Newcastle by CVP on 17 June 2024. The claimant, Mrs S McColl, was represented by herself and the respondent, Mark Swatts Morse LLP, was represented by Ms A Swatt, solicitor.
The tribunal held that the claimant’s claim for a statutory redundancy payment was well founded and succeeded. It also held that the claims for unpaid holiday pay and unpaid wages were well founded and succeeded.
On remedy, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the total gross sum of £3,068.55. That figure was made up of a statutory redundancy payment of £2,707.65, unpaid wages of £240.60 calculated as 2 days at £120.30 per day, and unpaid holiday pay of £120.30 calculated as 1 day at £120.30.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the statutory redundancy payment well founded and ordered payment of £2,707.65. | Upheld | — | £2,708 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the unpaid holiday pay claim well founded and awarded £120.30 for 1 day at £120.30 per day. | Upheld | — | £120 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the unpaid wages claim well founded and awarded £240.60 for 2 days at £120.30 per day. | Upheld | — | £241 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,069
- across all upheld claims
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.