Case 4107444/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Phillips v Kilgraston School Trust — 2025
- Case reference
- 4107444/2024
- Decision date
- 10 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge I McFatridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Phillips
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response had been presented, so the Employment Judge issued judgment on the available material under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £352.15 for unlawfully withheld wages and £3,925.63 for breach of contract arising from notice, with the latter calculated by reference to 10 weeks' pay less sums already received from the Insolvency Service.
The tribunal also found that Mr Phillips had been unfairly dismissed. It recorded, however, that he was not entitled to compensation on that head because he had been awarded a redundancy payment equivalent to the basic award and, given that the school had closed, there was a 100% chance he would have been dismissed in any event, so any compensatory award would be reduced by 100%. The judgment states that a separate judgment would be issued on the protective award head of claim.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had unlawfully withheld wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £352.15, calculated as £46,156 ÷ 12 = £3,846.33 less £3,494.18 already received from the Insolvency Service. | Upheld | — | £352 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found dismissal in breach of contract in relation to notice and ordered damages equivalent to 10 weeks' pay, calculated as 10 x £887.61 = £8,876.10 less £4,950.47 already received from the Insolvency Service. | Upheld | — | £3,926 |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed, but no compensation was awarded because the claimant had already been awarded a redundancy payment equivalent to the basic award and the tribunal considered there was a 100% chance he would have been dismissed in any event, so any compensatory award would fall to be reduced by 100%. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,278
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.