Case 4107668/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4107668/2019 Miss L Young v Angels Day Nursery Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 4107668/2019
- Decision date
- 12 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Frances Eccles
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4107668/2019 Miss L Young
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent stated that no part of the claim was contested, and an Employment Judge issued judgment on the available material under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that Miss L Young was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. Angels Day Nursery Ltd was ordered to pay damages of £1,313.60, calculated as 8 weeks at £164.20.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £328.40, calculated as 2 weeks at £164.20. The respondent was further found to have failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and was ordered to pay £470. The total of the sums ordered is £2,112.00.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment describes dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice and awards damages of £1,313.60. | Upheld | — | £1,314 |
| Redundancy | The judgment states the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £328.40. | Upheld | — | £328 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and orders payment of £470. | Upheld | — | £470 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,112
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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.