Case 4111271/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4111271/2019 Miss R Ali v BD 1971 Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 4111271/2019
- Decision date
- 3 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mark Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4111271/2019 Miss R Ali
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response had been presented to the claim, and Employment Judge Mark Whitcombe issued a Rule 21 judgment on the available material. The judgment records that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages, with an award of £1,286.05.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £108.00. It further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £122.40. The listed hearing on 24 January 2020 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 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 £1,286.05. | Upheld | — | £1,286 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £108.00 in damages. | Upheld | — | £108 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £122.40. | Upheld | — | £122 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,516
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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.