Case 4103106/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Callus Restaurants Ltd and HEK Car Sales Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 4103106/2019
- Decision date
- 18 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Robison Claimant
- Venue
- Dumfries
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Dumfries on 11 September 2019, Employment Judge M Robison recorded a judgment of consent in case 4118370/2018. The order required the first respondent, Callus Restaurants Ltd, to pay £1,350, described in the judgment as 5 weeks' pay for 45-hour weeks at £6 an hour, and the second respondent, H.E.K. Car Sales Ltd, to pay £1,365, described as 6.5 weeks' pay for 35-hour weeks at £6 an hour.
The judgment does not record any contested findings on liability or a separate legal analysis; it simply records the agreed payments. The related case 4103106/2019, said to concern the same subject matter, was withdrawn by the claimant. The judgment was entered in the register on 18 September 2019.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Consent judgment in case 4118370/2018. The first respondent was ordered to pay £1,350, described as 5 weeks' pay for 45-hour weeks at £6 an hour, and the second respondent was ordered to pay £1,365, described as 6.5 weeks' pay for 35-hour weeks at £6 an hour. | Settled | — | £2,715 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Case 4103106/2019, relating to the same subject matter, was withdrawn by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,715
- 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.