Case 4100569/2020 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4100569/2020 Mr A Black v Leslie White — 2020
- Case reference
- 4100569/2020
- Decision date
- 10 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mark Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4100569/2020 Mr A Black
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr A Black presented claims for a statutory redundancy payment, unlawful deduction from wages, and breach of contract arising from dismissal without notice against Leslie White. The respondent did not enter a response within the time allowed. The Employment Judge therefore determined liability and remedy on the available material without a hearing under Rule 21.
All three complaints succeeded. The tribunal ordered payment of the statutory redundancy entitlement, unpaid wages for 9-16 September 2019, and 12 weeks' notice pay. The formal dispositive section records the redundancy payment as £6,146.51, while paragraph 4(a) of the reasons states £6,146.54; the other two awards are stated consistently as £478.95 and £4,758.60. The reasons say the redundancy figure was calculated using the statutory formula and a week's pay of £396.55.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The formal order records £6,146.51. Paragraph 4(a) of the reasons states £6,146.54 for the redundancy payment, so the extracted text contains a 3p discrepancy. | Upheld | — | £6,147 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded for unpaid wages for the period 9-16 September 2019, calculated at 46.5 hours at £10.30 per hour. | Upheld | — | £479 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded as 12 weeks' notice pay following dismissal without notice. | Upheld | — | £4,759 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,384
- 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.