Case 4100121/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Todd v Renfrew Transport Services Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 4100121/2025
- Decision date
- 19 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S MacLean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Todd
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was issued under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because no response was presented by the respondent. The Employment Judge decided the claim on the available material.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £823.68, calculated as 72 hours at £11.44. It also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £4,576.00, calculated as 10 weeks at £457.60.
The tribunal further found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £4,576.00. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,229.15 for 13 days.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment states an unauthorised deduction from wages of 72 hours at £11.44. | Upheld | — | £824 |
| Breach of contract | Judgment awards damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice, calculated as 10 weeks at £457.60. | Upheld | — | £4,576 |
| Redundancy | Judgment states the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and is entitled to a redundancy payment of 10 weeks at £457.60. | Upheld | — | £4,576 |
| Holiday pay | Judgment states the respondent failed to pay 13 days of the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £1,229 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,205
- 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.