Case 4102252/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms C A Clark v Pavilius UK — 2022
- Case reference
- 4102252/2022
- Decision date
- 11 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge J McCluskey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms C A Clark
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Ms C A Clark, succeeded on her claim for a statutory redundancy payment against Pavilius UK. The Tribunal found that claim well founded and ordered the respondent to pay £969.21, subject to any deductions for tax and national insurance.
The claimant's breach of contract claim for notice pay was dismissed because it had been lodged out of time. The Tribunal said it was not prepared to exercise its discretion to hear the claim out of time and therefore had no jurisdiction to determine it.
The holiday pay claim was treated in the same way. It was lodged out of time, the Tribunal declined to exercise discretion to extend time, and the claim was dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Oral reasons were given at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The Tribunal found the claim for a statutory redundancy payment well founded and ordered payment of £969.21 less any deductions for tax and national insurance. | Upheld | — | £969 |
| Breach of contract | The notice pay claim was lodged out of time. The Tribunal declined to exercise discretion to hear it out of time and held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The holiday pay claim was lodged out of time. The Tribunal declined to exercise discretion to hear it out of time and held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £969
- 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.