Case 4100450/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A McLaren v Clyde Carpets And Flooring Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 4100450/2018
- Decision date
- 27 March 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Susan Walker
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A McLaren
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a rule 21 judgment issued by Employment Judge Susan Walker on the available material in the case of Mr A McLaren v Clyde Carpets And Flooring Ltd. The tribunal found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered the respondent to pay damages of £3,461.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £576. In addition, it held that the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,784. The hearing listed for 12 April 2018 was postponed because it was no longer required.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £3,461. | Upheld | — | £3,461 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £576. | Upheld | — | £576 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal held the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,784. | Upheld | — | £2,784 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,821
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.