Case 8000064/2026 · Employment Tribunal
O Andrew v Superlabs Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 8000064/2026
- Decision date
- 3 August 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Donnell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
O Andrew
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNeither respondent presented a response. Employment Judge O’Donnell issued judgment on the available material under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. O Andrew withdrew the claim against the first respondent, Superlabs Ltd, and the tribunal dismissed that claim under Rule 51.
The tribunal found that the second respondent, Superlabs AS, had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered it to pay £129,055.85. It also found that Superlabs AS had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered it to pay a further £16,406.25. The two awards total £145,462.10.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The claimant withdrew the claim against Superlabs Ltd, which was dismissed under Rule 51. The judgment does not specify the type of claim withdrawn. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Award against the second respondent, Superlabs AS. | Upheld | — | £129,056 |
| Holiday pay | Award against the second respondent, Superlabs AS. | Upheld | — | £16,406 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £145,462
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- Rule 51 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.