Case 4106725/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Lindsay Allan v 15 Ailsa Care Limited — 2018
- Case reference
- 4106725/2017
- Decision date
- 9 April 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Lindsay Allan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place in Glasgow on 4 April 2018 before Employment Judge M Whitcombe. The tribunal recorded that the Respondent conceded liability for both claims during the hearing and that the parties subsequently reached agreement on remedy, so the judgment was issued by consent.
On the first claim, the tribunal found that Miss Lindsay Allan had been wrongfully dismissed. It stated that she was entitled to 4 weeks' notice pay as damages for breach of contract, and ordered the Respondent to pay the agreed sum of £1,198.35 net of tax and other deductions.
On the second claim, the tribunal found that the Respondent had unlawfully deducted £450 gross from the Claimant's wages and ordered payment of that sum. The judgment also records that there was no request for written reasons.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal recorded that the Respondent conceded liability during the hearing. The Claimant was found to have been wrongfully dismissed and was awarded 4 weeks' notice pay as damages for breach of contract, in the agreed net sum of £1,198.35. | Upheld | — | £1,198 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal recorded that the Respondent conceded liability during the hearing. It found an unlawful deduction of £450 gross from the Claimant's wages and ordered that sum to be paid. | Upheld | — | £450 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,648
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,198
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.