Case 4110373/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Roberts v Mr J Laming (Deceased) — 2019
- Case reference
- 4110373/2019
- Decision date
- 6 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Sangster
- Venue
- Edinburgh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Roberts
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal gave oral reasons at the hearing and upheld the claimant's claims for sums due on termination of employment. It found that Miss J Roberts was entitled to £555.75, less deductions for tax and national insurance, for hours worked before her employment ended, and that this sum had not been paid in breach of contract.
It also found that she was entitled to £159.60, less deductions for tax and national insurance, for holidays accrued but untaken at the end of employment, again unpaid in breach of contract. In addition, the tribunal found she was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment of £638.85 on termination, which had not been paid. The respondent was ordered to pay each sum to the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to £555.75, less deductions for tax and national insurance, for hours worked prior to termination. It held this was unpaid in breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £556 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to £159.60, less deductions for tax and national insurance, for holidays accrued but untaken on termination. It held this was unpaid in breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £160 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment of £638.85 on termination, which had not been paid. | Upheld | — | £639 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,354
- 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.