Case 4105551/2024 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105551/2024 Ms MA Kelly v Glasgow East Women’s Aid (in Liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 4105551/2024
- Decision date
- 6 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105551/2024 Ms MA Kelly
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented to the claim, and the Employment Judge issued a rule 21 judgment on the available material. The first respondent was found to have made an unauthorised deduction from wages and was ordered to pay £202.36. The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £844.10 in damages.
The tribunal further found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,549.93. Because the claimant had already received £1,819.66 from the Redundancy Payments Service, the first respondent was ordered to pay the balance of £730.27. The tribunal also found that the first respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £985.97. The total of the sums ordered payable by the first respondent is £2,762.70.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £202 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded as damages for notice pay after the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £844 |
| Redundancy | Tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to £2,549.93, with £1,819.66 already received from the Redundancy Payments Service. | Upheld | — | £730 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the first respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £986 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,763
- 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.