Case 4102067/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Stafford v Specialist Computer Systems Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 4102067/2020
- Decision date
- 3 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Susan Walker
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Stafford
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment by Employment Judge Susan Walker on the available material because no response had been presented to the claim. The tribunal recorded that the hearing listed for 26 June 2020 was cancelled. The judgment is dated 1 June 2020 and was entered in the register on 3 June 2020.
The tribunal upheld Mr P Stafford's claim for an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered Specialist Computer Systems to pay £5,472. It also upheld the claim for a redundancy payment and ordered payment of £3,937.
The tribunal further found that the respondent was in breach of contract for failing to give notice or pay in lieu of notice, and awarded damages of £2,625. The total monetary award recorded in the judgment is £12,034.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment on the available material; no response was presented to the claim. | Upheld | — | £5,472 |
| Redundancy | Rule 21 judgment on the available material; no response was presented to the claim. | Upheld | — | £3,937 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found a breach of contract in failing to give notice or pay in lieu thereof and awarded damages. | Upheld | — | £2,625 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,034
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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.