Case 4102149/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Muir v Shettleston Dental Surgery — 2020
- Case reference
- 4102149/2020
- Decision date
- 26 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Susan Walker
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Muir
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented to the claim, and the Employment Judge issued judgment on the available material under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The tribunal found that Miss K Muir had been unfairly dismissed by Shettleston Dental Surgery and awarded her £14,698 in compensation.
That award was broken down as a basic award of £2,223, stated to reflect 9 years' employment at a weekly wage of £247, and a compensatory award of £12,475, described as a year’s salary plus £250 for loss of statutory rights. The tribunal also found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £243.20 in respect of that claim.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal awarded £14,698 for unfair dismissal, comprising a basic award of £2,223 and a compensatory award of £12,475. | Upheld | — | £14,698 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £243.20. | Upheld | — | £243 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,941
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,223
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £12,475
- compensatory remedy recorded
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.