Case 4110771/2021 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4110771/2021 Mr S Alexander v Hillcrest Finance Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 4110771/2021
- Decision date
- 20 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge I McPherson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4110771/2021 Mr S Alexander
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response was presented to the claim, and the Employment Judge issued a Rule 21 judgment on the available material. The tribunal found that Hillcrest Finance Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £20,618, the figure being based on the claimant's additional information provided on 13 October 2021.
The tribunal also found that Mr S Alexander was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It ordered the respondent to pay damages of £1,250.75, again based on the claimant's additional information provided on 13 October 2021. The hearing listed for 22 October 2021 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment; award based on the claimant's additional information provided on 13 October 2021. | Upheld | — | £20,618 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages were based on the claimant's additional information provided on 13 October 2021. | Upheld | — | £1,251 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £21,869
- 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.