Case 4110568/2019 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Elaine Wood v (2) Stephen Wood Represented by:15 Mr Mowat (Solicitor) Douglas Hotel Arran Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 4110568/2019
- Decision date
- 28 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Elaine Wood
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing held remotely by CVP on 24 and 25 August 2020, the tribunal held that both Elaine Wood and Stephen Wood were unfairly dismissed by Douglas Hotel Arran Ltd. It recorded that there would be no reduction in compensation for contributory fault, but that the compensatory award would be reduced by 80% to reflect the chance of fair dismissals following a fair procedure.
The first claimant was also awarded the balance of her notice pay as damages for breach of contract. The compensation due to the claimants was agreed: Elaine Wood received a basic award of £6,300, a compensatory award of £3,825.51 and notice pay of £1,496.03; Stephen Wood received a basic award of £2,362.50 and a compensatory award of £4,523.80. Oral reasons were given and no written reasons were requested.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Elaine Wood. Basic award £6,300 and compensatory award £3,825.51; notice pay was awarded separately as breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £10,126 |
| Breach of contract | Balance of notice pay awarded to the first claimant as damages. | Upheld | — | £1,496 |
| Unfair dismissal | Stephen Wood. Basic award £2,362.50 and compensatory award £4,523.80. | Upheld | — | £6,886 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £18,508
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £8,663
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £8,349
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.