Case 4100676/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Cabras v Bottega Siciliana Ltd — 2017
- Case reference
- 4100676/2017
- Decision date
- 16 June 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Cabras
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was determined on the available material under rule 21 because no response had been presented. Employment Judge Ian McPherson issued judgment without a response from the respondent, and the hearing listed for 29 June 2017 was cancelled.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £1,778.16, described as six weeks’ unpaid wages at £296.36 per week. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £296.36, being one week’s pay.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered £574.94, being 9.7 days’ entitlement at a daily rate of £59.27. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to provide a written statement of terms and conditions of employment and ordered £1,185.45, being four weeks’ pay. The total sum awarded across the four orders was £3,834.91.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded for 6 weeks unpaid wages at £296.36 per week. | Upheld | — | £1,778 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice; awarded one week's pay. | Upheld | — | £296 |
| Holiday pay | Awarded for 9.7 days holiday entitlement at a daily rate of £59.27. | Upheld | — | £575 |
| Other | Awarded for failure to provide a written statement of terms and conditions of employment; no specific taxonomy category fits more closely. | Upheld | — | £1,185 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,835
- 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.