Case 4121154/2018 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4121154/2018 Ms M Millar v Represented by: Mark Allison - Solicitor Elizabeth Wilson — 2018
- Case reference
- 4121154/2018
- Decision date
- 26 November 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S. MacLean Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4121154/2018 Ms M Millar
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued on the available material because no response had been presented to the claim. Employment Judge S. MacLean decided the case without a hearing on the papers and recorded the judgment on 26 November 2018.
The tribunal upheld the claimant's claim for unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered the respondent to pay £542.88. It also upheld the claim for breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £1,879.20.
The tribunal further found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and held that she was entitled to a redundancy payment of £4,698.00. The judgment does not record any separate award split beyond those individual sums, and the total monetary outcome on the face of the judgment is £7,120.08.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £543 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded as damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £1,879 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £4,698 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,120
- 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.