Case 8000310/2025 · Employment Tribunal
E.T. Z (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8000310/2025 (V)5 Held on May 2025 Employment Judge J M Hendry Mr David Vacek v Society Restaurant Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 8000310/2025
- Decision date
- 15 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
Parties
2 namedClaimant
E.T. Z (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8000310/2025 (V)5 Held on May 2025 Employment Judge J M Hendry Mr David Vacek
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 6 May 2025, Employment Judge J M Hendry heard the claimant, Mr David Vacek, appearing in person, and the respondent, Society Restaurant Limited, represented by its General Manager, Mr R Khodr. The judgment records a single issue: the claimant’s claim for unpaid notice pay.
The tribunal found that claim to be well-founded. It ordered the respondent company to pay Mr Vacek the sum of £2,916.67, described in the judgment as the balance of notice due to him.
The judgment gives no further reasoning, does not identify any separate statutory test, and does not break the award into separate heads of loss. The decision was entered in the register on 15 May 2025.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claim for unpaid notice pay was well-founded and that the sum awarded was the balance of notice due. | Upheld | — | £2,917 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,917
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.