Case 4106672/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Balmer v Represented by Mr J Dennis CAS Representative Stewartry Rollershutter & Garage Doors Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 4106672/2024
- Decision date
- 8 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sangster
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Balmer
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal upheld the claimant’s breach of contract claim and found that the respondent had failed to pay wages for work undertaken between 28 August 2023 and 25 February 2024. It ordered payment of £6,100.55 net as damages for breach of contract.
It also upheld the claimant’s claim under s23 ERA 1996, finding an unlawful deduction from wages contrary to s13 ERA 1996 in respect of accrued but untaken holiday entitlement that ought to have been paid on termination. The respondent was ordered to pay £1,191.53 gross for that head of claim.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had not given the claimant a written statement of particulars of employment under s1 ERA 1996, and had also failed to provide written itemised pay statements under s8 ERA 1996. In consequence of the successful Schedule 5 Employment Act 2002 claim and the failure to issue the written statement, the tribunal awarded two weeks’ pay under s38(3) Employment Act 2002, calculated at £561.25 per week and totalling £1,122.50. No monetary award was made for the itemised pay statement failure. The tribunal also directed that income tax and employee National Insurance could be deducted from the gross sum at paragraph 2 if required by law.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent was in breach of contract for failing to pay wages for work undertaken between 28 August 2023 and 25 February 2024. | Upheld | — | £6,101 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that £1,191.53 had been unlawfully deducted from wages under s13 ERA 1996 in respect of accrued but untaken holiday entitlement due on termination. | Upheld | — | £1,192 |
| Other | The tribunal found the respondent failed to give the claimant a written statement of particulars of employment required by s1 ERA 1996. In consequence, and because the claimant succeeded in a Schedule 5 Employment Act 2002 claim, it awarded two weeks' pay under s38(3) Employment Act 2002 at £561.25 per week. | Upheld | — | £1,123 |
| Other | The tribunal found the respondent failed to furnish written itemised pay statements in accordance with s8 ERA 1996. No monetary award was made for this finding. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,415
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
6 references- s23 ERA 1996
- s13 ERA 1996
- s1 ERA 1996
- s8 ERA 1996
- s38(3) Employment Act 2002
- Schedule 5 Employment Act 2002
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.