Case 4103188/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Hector McNeil v Family Asset Protection Company — 2018
- Case reference
- 4103188/2018
- Decision date
- 26 April 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mary Kearns
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Hector McNeil
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented, so the tribunal issued a Rule 21 judgment on the available material. It found that Mr Hector McNeil had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. On the evidence available, the claimant was employed on an annual salary of £15,379 gross and was entitled to one week’s pay in lieu of notice, which the tribunal calculated at £296.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement. It accepted the calculation of 4.5 days owed at £59.15 per day, giving £266.18, and deducted £120.42 already paid, leaving £145.76. Because sums were rounded to the nearest whole pound, the tribunal ordered payment of £146 gross. The judgment states that payments were awarded gross of tax and National Insurance, and that the claimant remained responsible for accounting to HMRC on any sums recovered.
The listed hearing on 23 May 2018 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages equivalent to one week’s pay. | Upheld | — | £296 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that 4.5 days of holiday entitlement remained owed, calculated at £59.15 per day (£266.18) less £120.42 already paid, and awarded £146 gross after rounding. | Upheld | — | £146 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £442
- 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.