Case 4107387/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Stanczyk 10 v Alexander Anderson (Painter, Decorator and Ames Taper) Ltd CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 201315 In accordance with the power set out in — 2021
- Case reference
- 4107387/2020
- Decision date
- 4 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge J Hendry Date
Parties
2 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 4 February 2021 the Employment Tribunal for Scotland dealt with Mr D Stanczyk's claim on an unopposed basis and made orders under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The tribunal ordered Alexander Anderson (Painter, Decorator and Ames Taper) Ltd to pay a redundancy payment of £6,456, holiday pay for 11.7 days of £1,258.92, and pay in lieu of notice.
A certificate of correction dated 18 February 2021 later stated that the judgment sent on 4 February 2021 contained a clerical error and substituted £4,304 for the £538.80 figure in paragraph 3. The extracted text does not include any contested findings on liability or reasons beyond the unopposed Rule 21 orders.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Award based on the claimant's age and length of service. | Upheld | — | £6,456 |
| Holiday pay | Award stated as holiday pay for 11.7 days. | Upheld | — | £1,259 |
| Breach of contract | Certificate of correction dated 18 February 2021 substituted £4,304 for the £538.80 figure in the original text. | Upheld | — | £4,304 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,019
- 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.