Case 4108178/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Thomson v Regent Gold Services Limited (Mr Lyndsey Brown) — 2018
- Case reference
- 4108178/2018
- Decision date
- 3 August 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robert Gall
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Thomson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was determined under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. Employment Judge Robert Gall found that Regent Gold Services Limited, described in the title as including Mr Lyndsey Brown, had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr R Thomson's wages. The tribunal ordered payment of £860, stated to represent 100 hours worked at £8.60 per hour.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £259.32, described as 30.15 hours of holiday accrued but untaken at the date of termination, again calculated at £8.60 per hour. The hearing listed for 29 August 2018 was cancelled. The judgment records no separate award for basic award, compensatory award, injury to feelings, or interest.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £860, described as 100 hours worked at £8.60 per hour. | Upheld | — | £860 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £259.32, described as 30.15 hours of holiday accrued but untaken at termination at £8.60 per hour. | Upheld | — | £259 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,119
- 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.