Case 4107123/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4107123/2019 Mr M MacLeod v The Carloway Mill Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 4107123/2019
- Decision date
- 30 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4107123/2019 Mr M MacLeod
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was issued under rule 21 because no response had been presented. On the available material, the tribunal found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £5,856, calculated as 12 weeks at £488.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £6,588, calculated as 13.5 weeks at £488. It further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and awarded £1,952, calculated as 4 weeks at £488.
The tribunal additionally awarded £1,952 because the respondent had failed to provide the claimant with a statement of employment particulars. The judgment records this as 4 weeks at £488.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Damages awarded for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £5,856 |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £6,588 |
| Holiday pay | Award for unpaid holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £1,952 |
| Other | Award for failure to provide a statement of employment particulars. | Upheld | — | £1,952 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £16,348
- 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.