Case 4105679/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Scott v Greenock Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 4105679/2022
- Decision date
- 21 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Neilson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Scott
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dismissed the claims against Wee Fish Shop Greenock Limited, the first respondent. It found that Emma Scott, the second respondent, was the same legal person as Emma Scott t/a Wee Fish Shop Greenock, the third respondent. Reasons were given orally at the hearing on 20 March 2023, and the written record of the decision was dated 21 March 2023.
Against the third respondent, the tribunal ordered payment of a statutory redundancy payment of £6,600 to Ms L Scott. It also awarded £1,710 as compensation for breach of contract in respect of the notice period, and £780 in respect of accrued annual leave, each sum stated to be subject to appropriate tax and National Insurance deductions. The total award recorded in the judgment is £9,090.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal dismissed the claims against the first respondent and awarded the statutory redundancy payment against the third respondent after finding that the second respondent was the same legal person as the third respondent. | Upheld | — | £6,600 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded against the third respondent as compensation for breach of contract in respect of the claimant's notice period, less appropriate tax and National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £1,710 |
| Holiday pay | Awarded against the third respondent in respect of accrued annual leave, less appropriate tax and National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £780 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,090
- 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.