Case 4100795/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Miss D Duncan v Kingdom Maintenance Fife Ltd — 2017
- Case reference
- 4100795/2017
- Decision date
- 4 July 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss D Duncan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented to the claim, and Employment Judge Frances Eccles determined the case on the available material under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment records that the claimant, Miss D Duncan, succeeded without a hearing on the papers. The listed hearing on 2 August 2017 was cancelled.
The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It ordered the respondent, Kingdom Maintenance Fife Ltd, to pay damages of £1,040 for that breach.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £611.25 in respect of that claim.
In addition, the respondent was ordered to pay the claimant's Tribunal fee of £25. The judgment does not record any other remedy components beyond the two substantive sums and the fee order.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £1,040. | Upheld | — | £1,040 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £611.25. | Upheld | — | £611 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,676
- 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.