Case 4103342/2022 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4103342/2022 Mr S Webster v Roma Hair and Beauty (Voluntary Liquidation) C/O Robson Scott Associates Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 4103342/2022
- Decision date
- 19 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Robison Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4103342/2022 Mr S Webster
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was determined under rule 21 because no response had been presented. On the available material, Employment Judge M Robison issued judgment without a hearing and cancelled the hearing listed for 30 August 2022.
The tribunal found that Mr S Webster had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It ordered the respondent, Roma Hair and Beauty (Voluntary Liquidation) C/O Robson Scott Associates Ltd, to pay damages of £3,338.52, described as twelve weeks' net pay.
The tribunal also found that Mr Webster had been dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £8,262. The judgment records no separate award breakdown beyond those two sums, and the bottom-line monetary figure is the combined total of £11,600.52.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the dismissal was in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages equal to twelve weeks' net pay. | Upheld | — | £3,339 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £8,262 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,601
- 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.