Case 4102729/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4102729/2019 Mr G Hyslop v Stonefield Recruitment Limited T/A Driver Hire Dumfries — 2019
- Case reference
- 4102729/2019
- Decision date
- 8 April 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge F Jane Garvie
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4102729/2019 Mr G Hyslop
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal recorded that the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, breach of contract, unauthorised deduction from wages, and failure to pay holiday entitlement succeeded. The decision does not record any monetary award for those complaints in the extracted text.
The judgment also states that the issue of entitlement to compensation for shareholding due to termination of the claimant's employment would be determined at a hearing together with the issues in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c). No further reasoning, findings of fact, or remedy figures are set out in the extracted text provided.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal succeeded under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claimant's complaint of breach of contract succeeded under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as a complaint of 'unauthorised deduction from wages' and states that it succeeded. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment describes this as failure to pay holiday entitlement and states that it succeeded. | Upheld | — | — |
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.