Case 4100183/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4100183/2019 Miss N Falconer v Markinch Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 4100183/2019
- Decision date
- 14 March 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Iain
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4100183/2019 Miss N Falconer
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued because no response had been presented to the claim. Employment Judge Iain F Atack decided the case on the available material on 13 March 2019 and entered the judgment on 14 March 2019. The respondent was Markinch Ltd, Banner’s House.
The tribunal upheld two money claims. First, it found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £1,834.84 gross. Second, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £375.84 gross, described as 6 days of leave accrued but unpaid at the date of termination of employment.
No other claims, findings, or remedy components are set out in the judgment. The total monetary award on the face of the decision is £2,210.68 gross.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment: the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages and was ordered to pay £1,834.84 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,835 |
| Holiday pay | Rule 21 judgment: the respondent failed to pay holiday entitlement, assessed as 6 days of leave accrued but unpaid at the date of termination, and was ordered to pay £375.84 gross. | Upheld | — | £376 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,211
- 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.