Case 8000570/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Ogilvie v Global Eco Installations Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 8000570/2025
- Decision date
- 30 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge P O’Donnell
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Ogilvie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr P Ogilvie worked for Global Eco Installations Ltd as a cavity wall technician. He did not drive. The tribunal found that, when he and Ross Telford were recruited, JG told them that if RT was off a driver would be found for the claimant from the respondent or another business run by the directors. The tribunal preferred the evidence of the claimant and RT to JG and found there was no verbal agreement that the claimant would go unpaid if he could not work in the relevant circumstances, and that the claimant had not been given any written statement of terms and conditions of employment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found no oral agreement that the claimant would go unpaid if he could not travel to work, and held that the claimant was willing and available to work but was prevented from doing so because no driver was provided. The award of £1,392 for the deduction was increased by 25% to £1,740 because the respondent did not engage with the claimant's grievance. | Upheld | — | £1,740 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,820
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,740
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.13(3) ERA 1996
- Miles v Wakefield Metropolitan District Council [1987] IRLR 193 HL
- Beveridge v KLM UK Ltd [2000] IRLR 765 EAT
- s.1 ERA 1996
- s.38 Employment Act 2002
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.