Case 4106899/2020 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4106899/2020 Mr T Martin v Cygnet (OE) Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 4106899/2020
- Decision date
- 19 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge I McPherson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4106899/2020 Mr T Martin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued on the available material because no response had been presented to the claim. The claimant, Mr T Martin, succeeded on all of the matters determined in the judgment. The tribunal found that he had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered the respondent, Cygnet, to pay damages of £1,744.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and held that he was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,616. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £802.24.
The hearing listed for 22 January 2021 was cancelled. The judgment records no separate reasons beyond the Rule 21 disposal and the awards stated above, and it does not record any discrimination or other compensatory findings.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Rule 21 judgment: the tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £1,744. | Upheld | — | £1,744 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £2,616. | Upheld | — | £2,616 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £802.24. | Upheld | — | £802 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,162
- 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.