Case 4112364/2021 · Employment Tribunal
the Edinburgh Employment Tribunal On January 2022 by CVP Ms Nanette Morrison v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 4112364/2021
- Decision date
- 20 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Cowen In
Parties
1 namedClaimant
the Edinburgh Employment Tribunal On January 2022 by CVP Ms Nanette Morrison
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Nanette Morrison did not attend the hearing on 20 January 2022, despite notice by email and a call from the CVP clerk on the day. The claimant had also not responded to Tribunal requests in December 2021 and January 2022 for more information and evidence about the claim.
Q Squared Solutions Ltd had not filed an ET3 in time, but its application to extend time was dismissed because the only reason given for the delay was human error. The Employment Judge nevertheless considered the documents the respondent had provided under rule 21(2), and permitted the respondent’s representative to attend the CVP hearing under rule 21(3).
Those documents included an Annual Leave policy, a Time Off Balance spreadsheet showing holiday entitlement and leave taken, and a letter dated 7 September 2021 stating that any excess holiday would be deducted from final pay. The respondent also produced a September payslip showing an amount deducted.
In the absence of any evidence from the claimant to show that the sums deducted were incorrect, the Tribunal dismissed the claimant’s claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment does not identify the substantive claim by statutory label; it refers to a single claim and records that it was dismissed after considering holiday and final pay documents. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.