Case 4100407/2024 · Employment Tribunal
16 A (Scot) Rule judgment template (simple) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4100407/2024 Miss O McLaughlin v Reanimate — 2026
- Case reference
- 4100407/2024
- Decision date
- 27 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
Parties
2 namedClaimant
16 A (Scot) Rule judgment template (simple) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4100407/2024 Miss O McLaughlin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment on the papers after no response had been presented to the claim. The claimant was Miss O McLaughlin and the respondent was Reanimate. The tribunal dealt with the case on the available material and issued judgment without a hearing.
The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement. It ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £2,334.08. The award was calculated on the basis of 28 days of annual leave due, multiplied by 8 hours working time per day and £10.42 per hour, described as the hourly rate due for that work under the Working Time Regulations 1998.
The claims for unfair dismissal and redundancy payment were dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. The judgment also authorised the respondent to make any required deductions for income tax and employee National Insurance Contributions before payment, provided the sums were remitted to HMRC and written evidence of the deductions was given to the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Working time regulations | The tribunal treated the claim as failure to pay holiday entitlement under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and awarded the gross sum of £2,334.08, calculated as 28 days' annual leave due x 8 hours x £10.42 per hour. | Upheld | — | £2,334 |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,334
- 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.