Case 4104900/2017 · Employment Tribunal
4104900/2017 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4104900/2017 Mr P Mallam v St Mirren Car Parking — 2018
- Case reference
- 4104900/2017
- Decision date
- 30 April 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shona MacLean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
4104900/2017 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4104900/2017 Mr P Mallam
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal determined the case under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. It found that St Mirren Car Parking had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr P Mallam's wages and ordered payment of £1,331.25, described in the judgment as 1.775 hours at £7.50 per hour.
It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement of 23 hours and 50 minutes and ordered payment of £172.50. The judgment did not record any other findings, remedies, or legal tests, and the listed hearing on 19 April 2018 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal held the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages, calculated as 1.775 hours at £7.50 per hour. | Upheld | — | £1,331 |
| Holiday pay | Tribunal held the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement of 23 hours and 50 minutes. | Upheld | — | £173 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,504
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.