Case 4104693/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Daniel Oraca v Tech Yard Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 4104693/2018
- Decision date
- 4 July 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Daniel Oraca
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented by the respondent, so the Employment Judge dealt with the case under Rule 21 on the available material. The claim form had been sent to the respondent on 24 May 2018, and the respondent did not enter a response within the 28-day period or at all. The judge decided liability could properly be determined without a hearing.
On the material before him, the tribunal upheld three complaints. It found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages for February and March 2018, that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, and that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. The judge then determined remedy on the papers, including the claimant's reply of 28 June 2018 giving full details of the sums claimed.
The judgment ordered payment of £6,333.32 for the wages deduction, £3,166.66 for notice pay arising from the breach of contract on dismissal, and £3,166.66 for unpaid holiday entitlement. The total ordered was £12,666.64. The listed final hearing for 1 August 2018 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages for February and March 2018. | Upheld | — | £6,333 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages for notice pay. | Upheld | — | £3,167 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal held that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £3,167 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,667
- 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.