Case 4102799/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Thomson v Westcoat Butchers (2001) Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 4102799/2023
- Decision date
- 21 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge P O’Donnell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Thomson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr D Thomson worked as a butcher from 10 August 2007 until 18 February 2023. The respondent did not lodge an ET3, attempts at service were unsuccessful, and the hearing proceeded in the respondent's absence. The Tribunal amended the respondent's name to West Coast Butchers (2001) Ltd.
The Tribunal found that on 18 February 2023 the claimant was told the business was ceasing to trade and his employment was ending that day. It held that he had been dismissed by reason of redundancy within s.139 ERA 1996 and awarded statutory redundancy pay of £4,907.04, calculated by reference to 15 full years' service, age 31, and 12 weeks' gross pay at £408.92 per week.
The Tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed without notice. It held that this was a breach of contract and awarded £4,054.20, reflecting 12 weeks' net pay at £337.85 per week. Separately, it found an unlawful deduction from wages for the unpaid days worked on 16, 17 and 18 February 2023 and awarded £202.71, and it found that 4 days' untaken holiday remained at termination, awarding £270.28 in respect of pay in lieu under the Working Time Regulations 1998.
Finally, the Tribunal found that deductions from wages in respect of pension contributions should have been paid into the claimant's pension fund. It treated that obligation as a contractual term, referring to the officious bystander and business efficacy tests, but could only quantify the loss for the deductions evidenced in November 2022, December 2022 and January 2023. It awarded £182.84 for that breach of contract. The total award was £9,617.07.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The Tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy because the respondent ceased trading. Statutory redundancy pay was awarded on the basis of 15 full years' service, age 31, and 12 weeks' gross pay at £408.92 per week. | Upheld | — | £4,907 |
| Breach of contract | The claimant was dismissed without notice. The Tribunal treated the failure to give 12 weeks' notice as a breach of contract and awarded compensation based on 12 weeks' net pay at £337.85 per week. | Upheld | — | £4,054 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal found the respondent had not paid the claimant for work done on 16, 17 and 18 February 2023, after his last salary payment on 15 February 2023. | Upheld | — | £203 |
| Holiday pay | The Tribunal found the claimant had 4 days' untaken holiday at termination and awarded pay in lieu under the Working Time Regulations 1998. | Upheld | — | £270 |
| Breach of contract | The Tribunal held that deductions from wages for pension contributions should have been paid into the claimant's pension fund. It could only quantify the loss for deductions made in November 2022, December 2022 and January 2023 because no evidence was produced for the earlier periods. | Upheld | — | £183 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,617
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
9 references- s.135 ERA 1996
- s.139 ERA 1996
- s.162 ERA 1996
- s.86 ERA 1996
- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.27 ERA 1996
- Regulation 14 Working Time Regulations 1998
- officious bystander test
- business efficacy test
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.