Case 4113040/2018 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4113040/2018 Mr P Russell v Edinburgh Group Accommodation — 2018
- Case reference
- 4113040/2018
- Decision date
- 2 October 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mark Whitcombe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4113040/2018 Mr P Russell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued on the available material because no response had been presented to the claim. The claimant was Mr P Russell and the respondent was Edinburgh Group Accommodation.
The tribunal upheld the unlawful deduction from wages claim and ordered the respondent to pay £1,411. It also upheld the claim for unpaid holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £275.93. The judgment does not separately identify any other monetary heads of loss beyond those two awards.
The redundancy payment claim was dismissed because the claimant lacked the necessary continuous service to qualify for a redundancy payment. The judgment therefore records two successful monetary claims and one unsuccessful redundancy claim, with a total award of £1,686.93.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment issued on the available material; no response was presented by the respondent. | Upheld | — | £1,411 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £276 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found that the claimant lacked the necessary continuous service to qualify for a redundancy payment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,687
- 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.