Case 4114483/2014 · Employment Tribunal
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4114483/2014 Hearing Held in Edinburgh on March 2017 Employment Judge: M A Macleod (sitting alone) John Harrower v Respondent — 2017
- Case reference
- 4114483/2014
- Decision date
- 22 March 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Murdo A.
- Venue
- Edinburgh
Parties
1 namedClaimant
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4114483/2014 Hearing Held in Edinburgh on March 2017 Employment Judge: M A Macleod (sitting alone) John Harrower
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal described the case as a claim for unlawful deductions from wages. The first respondent said it had no liability because the business had transferred from an insolvent company, Descant Limited. The second respondent admitted Descant Limited was insolvent, did not admit that the first respondent was insolvent, and asserted that there had been a TUPE transfer to the first respondent's employment of the claimant.
After the hearing, the tribunal noted that on 22 December 2016 one of the claimants in related combined proceedings said by telephone that they had received payments from the second respondent in respect of the outstanding sums sought. The tribunal wrote to the claimant on 9 January 2017 to ask whether he had reached a settlement, and sent a reminder on 13 March 2017, but received no response.
The claimant did not attend the hearing on 21 March 2017 and gave no indication that he did not intend to appear. In those circumstances, the tribunal concluded that he did not intend to pursue the claim, and considered it likely that this was because he had received payment from the second respondent like the other claimants who had contacted the tribunal. The claim was therefore dismissed under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The reasons describe the case as a claim for unlawful deductions from wages. Although the listing also mentioned working time regulations, the judgment itself only expressly adjudicates the unlawful deductions claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 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.