Case 4105943/2022 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105943/2022 Ms Amy Tough v Burnside Inns Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 4105943/2022
- Decision date
- 8 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Doherty Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4105943/2022 Ms Amy Tough
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented to the claim, so the Employment Judge issued judgment on the available material under rule 21. On that basis, the tribunal found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered Burnside Inns Ltd to pay damages of £909.72.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £720. It further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £909.72 for that claim.
The claimant's unfair dismissal complaint also succeeded. The tribunal ordered a monetary award of £1,212.95 in respect of that claim. The judgment does not set out a separate breakdown for the unfair dismissal award, and no interest or other additional sums are recorded.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £910 |
| Redundancy | The judgment states the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £720 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment uses the wording 'failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement'. | Upheld | — | £910 |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal succeeded and a monetary award was ordered. | Upheld | — | £1,213 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,752
- 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.