Case 4106682/2020 · Employment Tribunal
16 A (Scot) Rule judgment template (simple) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4106682/2020 Mrs I Ciuchta v Shopfitting Partners LLP — 2020
- Case reference
- 4106682/2020
- Decision date
- 21 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Peter O’Donnell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
16 A (Scot) Rule judgment template (simple) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4106682/2020 Mrs I Ciuchta
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response had been presented to the claim, so the Employment Judge issued a rule 21 judgment on the available material. The judgment records that the claimant, Mrs I Ciuchta, had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, and the respondent was ordered to pay damages of £1,684.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and that she was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,057.52. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £842.
The hearing listed for 18 January 2021 was cancelled. The judgment was signed by Employment Judge Peter O'Donnell and entered in the register on 21 December 2020.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the dismissal was in breach of contract as to notice and ordered damages of £1,684. | Upheld | — | £1,684 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £2,057.52. | Upheld | — | £2,058 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £842. | Upheld | — | £842 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,584
- 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.