Case 4100006/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. Derek Reynolds v - Union Rep E Burgoyne and Sons Ltd. — 2022
- Case reference
- 4100006/2022
- Decision date
- 14 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tinnion
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. Derek Reynolds
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was heard by Employment Judge Tinnion at a CVP hearing on 12 April 2022. The claimant, Mr Derek Reynolds, was represented by a union representative and the respondent, E Burgoyne and Sons Ltd, was represented by Mr Burgoyne, a director.
The tribunal did not determine the merits of the claims. Instead, it recorded that the claimant's claim for unauthorised deduction from wages relating to statutory sick pay for 2-16 October 2021 was dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52.
The claimant's holiday pay claim under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was also dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52. A further claim about the non-supply of a P45 after termination was treated the same way.
No monetary award was made, and the judgment records only that the claims were withdrawn and dismissed under Rule 52.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim related to statutory sick pay for the period 2-16 October 2021 under section 13 ERA 1996; dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay claim under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and section 13 ERA 1996; dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Claim regarding the non-supply of a P45 after termination of employment; dismissed on withdrawal under Rule 52. | Withdrawn | — | — |
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.