Case 4104462/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Agnew v Hlh Venues Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 4104462/2018
- Decision date
- 20 June 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shona MacLean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Agnew
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Shona MacLean issued a rule 21 judgment on the material available. The tribunal found that Hlh Venues Ltd had failed to pay Mr R Agnew's holiday entitlement and ordered the respondent to pay £405, based on 4.5 days at £90 per day.
The tribunal also found that the claim under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well-founded. It ordered the respondent to pay £180 as unlawful deductions from wages, based on 2 days at £90 per day.
No other claims, remedies, or factual findings are recorded in the short judgment. The total sum ordered is £585.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £405, calculated as 4.5 days at £90 per day. | Upheld | — | £405 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was found well-founded and the tribunal ordered payment of £180, calculated as 2 days at £90 per day. | Upheld | — | £180 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £585
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.