Case 4105556/2024 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105556/2024 Mrs L Nixon v Glasgow East Women’s Aid (in Liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 4105556/2024
- Decision date
- 6 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105556/2024 Mrs L Nixon
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningUnder rule 21, no response had been presented and the Employment Judge determined the claim on the available material. The tribunal found that the first respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £181.07. It also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £553.20 in damages.
The tribunal further found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £17,201.75. As the claimant had already received £15,887.90 from the Redundancy Payments Service, the first respondent was ordered to pay the remaining £1,313.85. The tribunal also found that the first respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £404.88.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £181 |
| Breach of contract | This related to dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £553 |
| Redundancy | The judgment states the claimant was entitled to £17,201.75, of which £15,887.90 had been paid by the Redundancy Payments Service; the first respondent was ordered to pay the balance of £1,313.85. | Upheld | — | £1,314 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £405 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,453
- 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.