Case 4100369/2026 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Nunes da Silva v Represented by: Mr B McLaughlin, Solicitor My Second Home Nursery — 2026
- Case reference
- 4100369/2026
- Decision date
- 10 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Beyzade
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Nunes da Silva
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs M Nunes da Silva withdrew her complaints against My Second Home Nursery of unauthorised deductions from wages, comprising minimum wage and other wages, contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
She also withdrew her complaint of detriment on the grounds that action had been taken or proposed on her behalf with a view to enforcing or securing the benefit of a right to which section 23 of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998 applies. Employment Judge Beyzade dismissed the withdrawn complaints under Rule 51 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. No monetary remedy was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaints concerned unauthorised deductions from wages, comprising minimum wage and other wages, contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. They were withdrawn and dismissed under Rule 51 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | The claimant withdrew a complaint of detriment on the grounds that action had been taken or proposed with a view to enforcing or securing the benefit of a right to which section 23 of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998 applies. The complaint was dismissed under Rule 51 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. | Withdrawn | — | — |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.