Case 4101262/2023 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4101262/2023 Mr S Tweeddale v Alchemy Hair & Aesthetics Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 4101262/2023
- Decision date
- 10 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mark Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4101262/2023 Mr S Tweeddale
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response had been presented to the claim, so the Employment Judge issued judgment on the available material under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The hearing listed for 12 April 2023 was cancelled. The judgment is dated 8 March 2023 and was entered in the register on 10 March 2023.
The tribunal upheld the claimant's breach of contract claim in respect of notice. It found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract and ordered the respondent to pay damages in the net sum of £2,499.12, calculated as 6 weeks at a net weekly pay rate of £416.52.
The tribunal also upheld the redundancy payment claim. It found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment in the gross sum of £3,175.44, calculated as 6 weeks at a gross weekly pay rate of £529.24. No separate award of interest or other remedy is recorded in the judgment.
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 ordered payment of damages in the net sum of £2,499.12, calculated as 6 weeks x £416.52 net weekly pay. | Upheld | — | £2,499 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and held that he was entitled to a redundancy payment in the gross sum of £3,175.44, calculated as 6 weeks x £529.24 gross weekly pay. | Upheld | — | £3,175 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,675
- 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.