Case 4102366/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Gr8Trades Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 4102366/2022
- Decision date
- 25 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge P O'Donnell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response had been presented, so the Employment Judge issued a Rule 21 judgment on the material available. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £8,889.09, made up of lying time, hourly rate differences for two periods, and overtime payments referred to in the schedule of loss.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered £1,623.62. It further ordered £2,029.50 for failure to provide a written statement of terms and conditions, and £1,969.49 for loss of employer's pension contributions. The total sum ordered was £14,511.70.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and said this sum was the cumulative total of lying time, hourly rate differences, and overtime payments. | Upheld | — | £8,889 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £1,624 |
| Other | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to provide the claimant with a written statement of terms and conditions and awarded 4 weeks' pay; no separate statutory basis is stated in the judgment. | Upheld | — | £2,030 |
| Other | The tribunal found the claimant had suffered loss of employer's pension contributions and ordered payment of this amount; the judgment does not identify a separate legal label for this head of loss. | Upheld | — | £1,969 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,512
- 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.