Case 4107322/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4107322/2019 Mrs M Pollock v Robert Dick Tailors — 2019
- Case reference
- 4107322/2019
- Decision date
- 23 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mary Kearns
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4107322/2019 Mrs M Pollock
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a rule 21 judgment issued because no response had been presented to the claim. Employment Judge Mary Kearns decided the case on the available material and cancelled the hearing listed for 20 September 2019.
The tribunal found that Mrs M Pollock had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It ordered Robert Dick Tailors to pay damages of £2,760.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £5,865. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £82.80, calculated on 1.8 days at a 5-day week and £230 per week.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £2,760 damages. | Upheld | — | £2,760 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded £5,865 as a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £5,865 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £82.80, calculated on 1.8 days at a 5-day week and £230 per week. | Upheld | — | £83 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,708
- 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.