Case 4102318/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S McIntyre v Aspen Capital Consultants — 2017
- Case reference
- 4102318/2017
- Decision date
- 15 September 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge F Jane Garvie
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S McIntyre
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment after no response had been presented to the claim. On the available material, Employment Judge F Jane Garvie determined the claim without a hearing on the merits. The hearing listed for 20 October 2017 was cancelled.
The tribunal found that Aspen Capital Consultants had made an unauthorised deduction from Miss S McIntyre's wages and ordered payment of £320, calculated as 4 days at £10 per hour for an 8-hour day. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £480, calculated as 6 days at £10 per hour for an 8-hour day.
A further finding was made that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. The tribunal ordered payment of £720, calculated as 9 days at £10 per hour for an 8-hour working day. The judgment also recorded that any tax and national insurance payable was a matter for the claimant to discuss with HMRC.
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; the tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and awarded 4 days at £10 per hour for an 8-hour day. | Upheld | — | £320 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded 6 days at £10 per hour for an 8-hour day. | Upheld | — | £480 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent failed to pay holiday entitlement and awarded 9 days at £10 per hour for an 8-hour working day. | Upheld | — | £720 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,520
- 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.