Case 4102747/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4102747/2019 Mr L Stobie v Dem-Master Demolition Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 4102747/2019
- Decision date
- 25 June 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robert Gall
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4102747/2019 Mr L Stobie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented to the claim. The Employment Judge therefore issued judgment under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 on the available material, with the decision dated 25 June 2019.
The tribunal found that Mr L Stobie had been unlawfully dismissed and ordered Dem-Master Demolition Ltd to pay £9,738.37 in respect of that claim. The extracted text does not break the award into components and gives no further reasoning beyond the rule 21 judgment.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £2,885.02. The judgment records no separate analysis for that sum and does not identify any additional remedy elements beyond the two monetary awards.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant was 'unlawfully dismissed'. Classified here as unfair dismissal based on the tribunal context and the gov.uk listing. | Upheld | — | £9,738 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £2,885 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,623
- 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.