Case 4102535/2023 · Employment Tribunal
IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL (SCOTLAND) AT EDINBURGH Judgment of the Employment Tribunal in Case No: 4102535/2023 Heard at Edinburgh on the th of June 2023 at am Employment Judge J G d’lnverno Ms A Archibald v Hope and Rose Industries Ltd . — 2023
- Case reference
- 4102535/2023
- Decision date
- 13 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Venue
- Edinburgh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL (SCOTLAND) AT EDINBURGH Judgment of the Employment Tribunal in Case No: 4102535/2023 Heard at Edinburgh on the th of June 2023 at am Employment Judge J G d’lnverno Ms A Archibald
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Ms A Archibald was summarily dismissed by Hope and Rose Industries Ltd on 2 January 2023 for reason of redundancy. It recorded that she had been employed from 2 May 2014 with Manor View Housing and then, following a relevant transfer under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006, with continuity of employment by the respondent until 3 January 2023. The tribunal found that at the effective date of termination she was 65 years old, had 8 completed years of service, and had a gross weekly pay of £294 and net weekly pay of £273.46.
On that basis, the tribunal held that she was entitled under section 162 Employment Rights Act 1996 to a statutory redundancy payment of £3,528. It also held that, having been dismissed without notice, she was entitled under section 86 Employment Rights Act 1996 to pay in lieu of minimum statutory notice of £2,187.68, calculated by reference to 8 weeks at £273.46 net per week.
The tribunal further found that her holiday year ran from 31 March to 1 April annually, that her annual entitlement was 28 days paid leave, and that by the effective date of termination she had accrued 21 days across 9 months, of which 9 days had been taken. It awarded £656.40 for 12 days of untaken annual leave and found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages of £492.28 net in respect of 45 hours worked between 20 December 2022 and 3 January 2023, calculated by reference to 1.8 weeks of her contracted 25-hour week. The judgment states that the tribunal issued an oral judgment and oral reasons at the hearing and that no written reasons were attached.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment awarded under section 162 ERA 1996, calculated as 8 years x 1.5 weeks x £294 gross weekly pay. | Upheld | — | £3,528 |
| Wrongful dismissal | Award for pay in lieu of minimum statutory notice entitlement under section 86 ERA 1996, calculated as 8 weeks x £273.46 net weekly pay. | Upheld | — | £2,188 |
| Holiday pay | Award for 12 days of accrued but untaken paid annual leave at £54.40 net per day. | Upheld | — | £656 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Award for an unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of 45 hours worked between 20 December 2022 and 3 January 2023. | Upheld | — | £492 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,864
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 162 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 86 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006
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.