Case 4120223/2018 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4120223/2018 Miss A Stewart v Clootie Dumpling Ltd T/a Taste — 2018
- Case reference
- 4120223/2018
- Decision date
- 22 November 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S. MacLean Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4120223/2018 Miss A Stewart
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a rule 21 judgment issued on the material available because no response had been presented to the claim. Employment Judge S. MacLean recorded that the hearing listed for 14 December 2018 was cancelled.
The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered the respondent to pay £283.20, described as 3 weeks' wages. It also found that the dismissal was by reason of redundancy and that the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment of £141.60, described as 1.5 weeks' wages.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £188.80 for 10 days' holiday. The total monetary award was £613.60.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £283.20, described as 3 weeks' wages. | Upheld | — | £283 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £141.60, described as 1.5 weeks' wages. | Upheld | — | £142 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £188.80, described as 10 days' holiday. | Upheld | — | £189 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £614
- 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.