Case 8000714/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Member L Millar Tribunal Member W Muir Ms K Hornal v Legends Bar – Yules Bar Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 8000714/2024
- Decision date
- 20 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Jones Tribunal
- Venue
- Glasgow
- Panel members
- L Millar, W Muir
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Member L Millar Tribunal Member W Muir Ms K Hornal
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Hornal worked at Legends Bar from September 2023 until 19 May 2024. The tribunal found that she had not been given a contract, written statement of terms, or any information about annual leave. It accepted that she had raised concerns more than once about lewd comments and requests for a kiss from a customer, and that on or around 18 May 2024 that customer slapped her backside while she was working. After a meeting on 19 May 2024 with Mr Clark, Mr Yuill and Ms Washington, she was dismissed without notice and was not given a written reason.
The tribunal held that the dismissal was wrongful because there was no basis for summary dismissal, and it awarded one week’s notice pay of £220 gross. It also upheld the claim for failure to provide written particulars under section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996. Applying section 38(2)-(5) of the Employment Act 2002, it decided it was just and equitable to award the higher statutory amount of four weeks’ pay because no employment documentation had been provided at all, producing an award of £1,760 gross.
On holiday pay, the tribunal found that the claimant had not taken annual leave and calculated 73 hours outstanding by proceeding on an 18 September 2023 start date, producing an award of £803 gross. It accepted that the claimant had been sexually harassed by the customer on at least three occasions, but held that the Equality Act 2010 did not make the respondent liable for third-party harassment and that the respondent’s failure to address the conduct, or the dismissal itself, did not amount to harassment related to sex. That claim was dismissed, and the total award was £2,783 gross.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found there was no basis for summary dismissal and awarded one week's notice pay gross. | Upheld | — | £220 |
| Other | Failure to provide written particulars of employment under section 1 ERA 1996; the tribunal awarded the higher statutory amount of four weeks' pay under section 38(2)-(5) Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £1,760 |
| Holiday pay | Award for untaken accrued holiday on termination, calculated by the tribunal as 73 hours outstanding on the basis of an 18 September 2023 start date. | Upheld | — | £803 |
| Harassment | The tribunal accepted that the claimant had been sexually harassed by a customer on at least three occasions, but held that the Equality Act 2010 did not make the respondent liable for third-party conduct and that the failure to act, or the dismissal itself, did not amount to harassment related to sex. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,783
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
5 references- section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 38(2)-(5) Employment Act 2002
- Working Time Regulations 1998
- section 26 Equality Act 2010
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.