Case 4114754/2019 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4114754/2019 Mrs C Thomson v Harry’s Bakery Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 4114754/2019
- Decision date
- 4 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ian McPherson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4114754/2019 Mrs C Thomson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mrs C Thomson, presented claims against Harry’s Bakery Ltd for unfair dismissal, failure to pay redundancy pay, breach of contract for failure to pay notice pay, and failure to pay holiday pay. The claim form was sent to the respondent on 27 December 2019, but no response was lodged by the deadline of 24 January 2020 or at all.
On that basis, the Employment Judge determined under Rule 21 that liability could properly be decided without a hearing on the available material. The judgment states that all four complaints succeeded. The tribunal did not determine remedy in this judgment.
The matter was therefore listed for a separate hearing to determine the remedy to which the claimant was entitled.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Decided under Rule 21 without a response from the respondent; liability found, remedy not determined in this judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal recorded that the failure to pay redundancy pay succeeded; remedy left to a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim was for failure to pay notice pay and succeeded; remedy left to a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The failure to pay holiday pay claim succeeded; remedy left to a later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
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.