Case 8000715/2025 · Employment Tribunal
C Ruddy v PAS Capital Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 8000715/2025
- Decision date
- 14 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge P O’Donnell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
C Ruddy
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 22 judgment issued on the available material because the respondent presented no response to the claim. Employment Judge P O’Donnell therefore determined the case without a hearing on the papers. The claimant, C Ruddy, succeeded on all three heads of claim recorded in the judgment.
The tribunal found that PAS Capital Ltd had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £10,666.68 gross for the period January to April 2025. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £1,104.79 net, described as 2 weeks’ notice damages.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,887.18 gross. The awards together produced a total of £13,658.65. The judgment does not record any separate award of basic award, compensatory award, interest, or injury to feelings.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction from wages for the period January to April 2025. | Upheld | — | £10,667 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages awarded for 2 weeks' notice, stated as net. | Upheld | — | £1,105 |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay holiday entitlement; award stated as gross. | Upheld | — | £1,887 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,659
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 22 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.