Case 4107291/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4107291/2019 Miss S Hammond v Mangobean and 1 other — 2019
- Case reference
- 4107291/2019
- Decision date
- 9 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McFatridge
Parties
3 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4107291/2019 Miss S Hammond
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was first directed at Mangobean, which the tribunal recorded had no legal personality. After a hearing on 30 August 2019, the claim was served on Mango Bean (Scotland) Limited as an added party. The second respondent did not lodge a response within the statutory period.
On the material before it, the employment judge determined the case under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. The tribunal dismissed the claim so far as directed at the first respondent and found that the claim of unlawful deduction of wages succeeded against the second respondent.
The tribunal ordered Mango Bean (Scotland) Limited to pay the claimant £261.99 in respect of the unlawful deduction claim. No separate award breakdown was recorded beyond that figure.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal recorded that the claim was initially directed at the first respondent, who had no legal personality, and that the claim was then served on the second respondent after they were added as a party. The second respondent did not lodge a response within the statutory period. | Upheld | — | £262 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £262
- 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.