Case 8000327/2024 · Employment Tribunal
16 A (Scot) Rule judgment template (simple) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8000327/2024 Mr K Beaton v NAStech Timber Solutions Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 8000327/2024
- Decision date
- 22 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge I McFatridge Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
16 A (Scot) Rule judgment template (simple) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8000327/2024 Mr K Beaton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response had been presented to the claim, so the Employment Judge issued a rule 21 judgment on the available material. The tribunal found that the respondent had unlawfully withheld the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £4,364.40 gross.
The tribunal also found two breaches of contract. It awarded £865.38 for one week’s notice pay, calculated on the basis of a salary of £45,000 divided by 52, and £2,511.33 for unpaid employer and employee pension contributions said to be unpaid between March 2023 and January 2024. The hearing listed for 31 May 2024 was cancelled, and the respondent was permitted to make the usual tax and National Insurance deductions from the sums due before payment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had unlawfully withheld wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £4,364.40. | Upheld | — | £4,364 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim for notice pay. The tribunal awarded one week’s notice pay, calculated on the basis of £45,000 ÷ 52. | Upheld | — | £865 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim for unpaid pension contributions. The tribunal awarded £2,511.33 for employer and employee contributions unpaid between March 2023 and January 2024. | Upheld | — | £2,511 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,741
- 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.