Case 4111660/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4111660/2019 Mr B Duran Prieto v Heritage Cleaning Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 4111660/2019
- Decision date
- 26 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mark Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4111660/2019 Mr B Duran Prieto
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in which no response had been presented to the claim. On the available material, Employment Judge Mark Whitcombe found that Heritage Cleaning Ltd had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr B Duran Prieto's wages. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £4,282.50 in respect of that claim.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £1,110.00 for that claim. The hearing listed for 15 January 2020 was cancelled. The judgment does not record any other findings, legal tests, or separate remedy components beyond the two sums awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment: no response was presented. Tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £4,282.50. | Upheld | — | £4,283 |
| Holiday pay | Rule 21 judgment: no response was presented. Tribunal found the respondent failed to pay holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,110.00. | Upheld | — | £1,110 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,393
- 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.