Case 4101971/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss R Coyne v Floricana Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 4101971/2020
- Decision date
- 8 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Susan Walker
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss R Coyne
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented to the claim, and Employment Judge Susan Walker issued a Rule 21 judgment on the available material. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £1,230.77 to the claimant.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was entitled to payment in respect of accrued but untaken annual leave, awarding £69.23, and that the respondent was in breach of contract by failing to give notice, with damages of £923.08. In addition, the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment of £346.16. The total of the monetary awards made was £2,569.24.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,231 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment wording states that the claimant is entitled to a redundancy payment for accrued but untaken annual leave; this has been classified as holiday pay because the award relates to untaken annual leave. | Upheld | — | £69 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment says the respondent was in breach of contract by failing to give notice, and damages were awarded. | Upheld | — | £923 |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £346 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,569
- 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.