Case 4103177/2022 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4103177/2022 Hearing by Cloud Video Platform (CVP) at Edinburgh on August 2022 Employment Judge: M A Macleod Anna Rutkowska v EE Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 4103177/2022
- Decision date
- 2 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4103177/2022 Hearing by Cloud Video Platform (CVP) at Edinburgh on August 2022 Employment Judge: M A Macleod Anna Rutkowska
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed by EE Limited as a Customer Advisor. Her contracted hours were initially 12 per week and were later accepted by the respondent as having increased to 25 per week. She argued that from November 2021 her contract should have been treated as 35 hours per week, affecting her EVS payment, holiday pay and final week's pay.
The tribunal found that the claimant accepted an EVS payment of £2,910.84 calculated on a 25-hour contract. It held that there was a binding agreement for that payment and that the evidence did not show any agreement, written or verbal, to increase her contracted hours to 35 per week.
On holiday pay, the tribunal found that the claimant had not shown what holiday remained outstanding or what difference overtime should have made to her entitlement. On final week's pay, it found the evidence about hours, rates and calculation unclear. All claims failed and were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal treated the payment as an Enhanced Voluntary Severance payment agreed by offer and acceptance, and found no basis that a higher amount calculated on 35 hours per week was properly payable. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claimant challenged holiday pay on termination, but the tribunal found the evidence lacking in detail and that she had not shown she was deprived of holiday pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | This relates to the claimant's final week's pay. The tribunal found the evidence confused and unclear and held that the claimant had not shown what was properly payable. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- balance of probabilities
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.