Case 4104545/2024 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4104545/2024 Mr Greg McNeela v Williams Double Glazing Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 4104545/2024
- Decision date
- 10 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4104545/2024 Mr Greg McNeela
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was determined under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to enter a response within 28 days of the claim being sent on 10 April 2024. The Employment Judge decided on the available material that liability and remedy could properly be determined without a hearing.
The tribunal held that both of Mr Greg McNeela's complaints succeeded: unfair dismissal and breach of contract. For the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £4,950.00, calculated as 10 weeks at a gross weekly rate of £495.00. The claimant did not seek a compensatory award.
For the breach of contract claim, the tribunal awarded £3,200.00, calculated as 8 weeks at a net weekly rate of £400.00. No separate award for interest or injury to feelings was made in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal awarded a basic award of £4,950.00, calculated as 10 weeks x gross weekly pay of £495.00. The claimant did not seek a compensatory award. | Upheld | — | £4,950 |
| Breach of contract | Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal awarded £3,200.00, calculated as 8 weeks x net weekly pay of £400.00. | Upheld | — | £3,200 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,150
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £4,950
- statutory, unfair dismissal
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.