Case 4107991/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Kumar v Represented by: Ms M Rehan, Lay Representative Dunblane Castle Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 4107991/2020
- Decision date
- 12 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Murphy
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Kumar
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe final hearing took place remotely by CVP on 30 September 2021 before Employment Judge Murphy. The respondent had entered a response but did not attend the hearing, despite notice having been sent and further attempts made by the Tribunal Clerk to contact it. The tribunal proceeded in the respondent’s absence under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 after considering the available information and the practicable enquiries about the absence.
The tribunal upheld the claimant’s claim for an unauthorised deduction from wages contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It ordered Dunblane Castle Ltd to pay Mr R Kumar £2,506.79 in lieu of accrued untaken annual leave as at the termination of his employment. The judgment records that the sum was expressed gross of tax and national insurance, with any lawful deductions to be made by the respondent for HMRC purposes if applicable.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Award was made in lieu of accrued untaken annual leave at termination of employment; judgment states the sum was expressed gross of tax and national insurance. | Upheld | — | £2,507 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,507
- 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.