Case 4112420/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. S Johnston v Fast and Focused Express Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 4112420/2021
- Decision date
- 15 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Beyzade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. S Johnston
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal at Edinburgh, sitting by CVP on 14 March 2022, found that Mr S Johnston was an employee of Fast and Focused Express Ltd within the meaning of section 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 between 1 June 2019 and 10 September 2021. Oral reasons were given at the hearing and the written judgment records only the outcomes and awards.
The tribunal upheld the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of arrears of pay between 7 and 10 September 2020 and ordered the respondent to pay £340.00.
The tribunal also upheld the unfair dismissal claim. It awarded £680.00 as a basic award and £3,060.00 as a compensatory award, making £3,740.00 in total for that claim.
The Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseekers Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 were said to apply to the unfair dismissal award. The prescribed element was £2,720.00 for the period from dismissal on 10 September 2021 to 10 November 2021, and the monetary award exceeded the prescribed element by £1,020.00.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of arrears of pay between 7 and 10 September 2020. | Upheld | — | £340 |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was an employee between 1 June 2019 and 10 September 2021 and awarded £680 basic award plus £3,060 compensatory award. | Upheld | — | £3,740 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,080
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £680
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £3,060
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.