Case 4107252/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K McLaughlin v Somerset Crown & Bridge Limited — 2018
- Case reference
- 4107252/2018
- Decision date
- 18 July 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K McLaughlin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningUnder Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, the claimant’s claim form was sent to the respondent on 14 June 2018 and the respondent did not enter a response within the required period. On the available material, Employment Judge Frances Eccles determined remedy and entered judgment for the claimant on the complaints listed in the judgment.
The tribunal upheld the redundancy payment complaint and awarded £1,790.59, calculated in the reasons as £397.91 x 4.5 weeks. It also upheld the unauthorised deduction from wages claim for holiday pay and awarded £318.32, the contract claim for notice pay and awarded £1,668.40, and the complaint for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars and awarded £1,591.64, calculated as £397.91 x 4 weeks. The total award recorded by the judgment was £5,368.95.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,791 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £318 |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,668 |
| Other | Claim for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars; no more specific statutory label was given in the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,592 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,369
- 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.