Case 4104163/2018 · Employment Tribunal
(sitting alone) Lesley McCleary v Andrea Galloway and 2 others — 2018
- Case reference
- 4104163/2018
- Decision date
- 12 October 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Michelle Sutherland
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
4 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningLesley McCleary worked at Aromas from 22 August 1998 to 31 March 2018 across three ownership periods. The tribunal found that the business transferred under TUPE from DSG to ROP and then from ROP to the Respondent, that the claimant was assigned to the transferring undertaking, and that her continuity of employment was preserved. On that basis she had 19 years' continuous service and her normal weekly pay was £165 gross.
The unfair dismissal complaint was withdrawn by the claimant at the start of the final hearing and was dismissed. The tribunal recorded that the respondent had closed the business because of mounting debts and had given notice on 27 March 2018 that employment would end on 31 March 2018, but the unfair dismissal claim itself did not proceed to a substantive determination.
The tribunal upheld the breach of contract claim for failure to give statutory notice. Applying section 86 ERA 1996, it found the claimant was entitled to 12 weeks' notice, that she had received 4 days' notice, and that the balance of 11.43 weeks at £165 gross produced notice pay of £1,885.95 gross. The tribunal also upheld the statutory redundancy pay claim under sections 135 and 162 ERA 1996. It found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy, had 4 years' service below age 41 and 15 years' service at or over age 41, and was therefore entitled to 26.5 weeks' redundancy pay, amounting to £4,372.50 gross.
The holiday pay claim failed. The tribunal found there was no collective or written agreement fixing the leave year, so for this employee it began on 1 October. By the termination date of 31 March 2018 she had accrued 2.8 weeks' leave but had taken 3 weeks during the leave year, so there was no accrued but untaken leave outstanding. The judgment ordered the two successful gross payments without deduction, with tax and national insurance to be accounted for by the claimant if due.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Withdrawn by the claimant at the start of the final hearing and therefore dismissed. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Successful notice pay claim. The tribunal found 19 years' continuous service, 12 weeks' statutory notice entitlement, 4 days' notice actually given, and calculated the balance at 11.43 weeks at £165 gross per week. | Upheld | — | £1,886 |
| Redundancy | Successful statutory redundancy pay claim. The tribunal found dismissal by reason of redundancy, 19 years' continuous service, and 26.5 weeks' redundancy entitlement at £165 gross per week. | Upheld | — | £4,373 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found no relevant agreement fixing the leave year, so it started on 1 October; by 31 March 2018 the claimant had accrued 2.8 weeks' leave but had already taken 3 weeks, so no payment was due. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,258
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
11 references- s.218 ERA 1996
- Regulation 3 TUPE Regulations 2006
- Regulation 4 TUPE Regulations 2006
- s.221 ERA 1996
- s.227 ERA 1996
- s.86 ERA 1996
- s.135 ERA 1996
- s.162 ERA 1996
- Regulations 13 and 13A WTR 1998
- Regulations 14 and 16 WTR 1998
- Regulation 30 WTR 1998
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.