Case 4110452/2021 · Employment Tribunal
16 A (Scot) Rule judgment template (simple) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4110452/2021 Mr K McArthur v SRS Care Solutions Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 4110452/2021
- Decision date
- 18 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lucy Wiseman
Parties
2 namedClaimant
16 A (Scot) Rule judgment template (simple) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4110452/2021 Mr K McArthur
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was determined under rule 21 because no response had been presented. Employment Judge Lucy Wiseman decided the case on the available material and issued judgment on 8 October 2021, entered in the register on 18 October 2021.
The tribunal upheld the claim for unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered the respondent, SRS Care Solutions Ltd, to pay £342. It also upheld the claim that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £256.50.
No other remedy components were recorded in the judgment. The total amount ordered was £598.50.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £342. The decision was issued under rule 21 on the available material because no response had been presented. | Upheld | — | £342 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £256.50. The decision was issued under rule 21 on the available material because no response had been presented. | Upheld | — | £257 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £599
- 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.