Case 4111753/2021 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND)Case No: 4111753/2021 Miss S McNeil v Forth Care Limited (in Liquidation) and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 4111753/2021
- Decision date
- 14 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Kearns Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND)Case No: 4111753/2021 Miss S McNeil
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal issued a Rule 21 judgment after the respondent failed to enter a response to the claim form that had been sent on 25 October 2021. On the material before it, the Employment Judge held that liability could properly be determined without a hearing. The claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, a protective award under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation Act) 1992, redundancy pay, holiday pay, arrears of pay and notice pay therefore succeeded.
The judgment records that on 16 May 2022 the respondent had been placed into creditors' voluntary liquidation and that the joint liquidators said they had no intention of entering the proceedings. It also records that there were no funds in the liquidation to satisfy the claims. The second respondent was removed from the proceedings. Remedy was not determined in this judgment; the tribunal said the claimant's entitlement would be decided by an Employment Judge at a hearing if required.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Trade union | Protective award under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation Act) 1992. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records the claim as 'arrears of pay'. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records the claim as 'notice pay' and does not state a different legal label. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 16 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 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.