Case 4104853/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v CFF Contractors — 2017
- Case reference
- 4104853/2017
- Decision date
- 29 November 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was dealt with under rule 21 because no response had been presented, and Employment Judge Ian McPherson determined the claim on the available material. The tribunal made one monetary award and otherwise disposed of the remaining heads of claim on the papers.
The tribunal upheld the wages claim. It found that the respondents had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered them to pay £1,500 for unpaid wages for August 2017.
The breach of contract claim in relation to notice was dismissed. The tribunal found that the claimant was not dismissed in breach of contract because he resigned from the respondents’ employment on 15 September 2017.
A further complaint that holiday entitlement had not been paid was not determined in the claimant’s favour at that stage because he had not specified the amount of holiday pay said to be due and unpaid. The tribunal therefore made no order on that head of claim and directed the claimant, if he wished to pursue it, to provide proper specification and the basis of his calculation within 10 days of the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £1,500 in respect of unpaid wages for August 2017. | Upheld | — | £1,500 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was not dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice because he resigned from employment on 15 September 2017. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claimant said holiday entitlement had not been paid, but he had not specified the amount due and unpaid, so the tribunal did not make an order. He was directed to provide proper specification and the basis of calculation within 10 days if he wished to pursue that part of the claim. | Other | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,500
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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.