Case 8001109/2024 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8001109/2024 Mr P Hannaford v Andy Race Fish Merchants Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 8001109/2024
- Decision date
- 20 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Maclean Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8001109/2024 Mr P Hannaford
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a rule 21 judgment issued because no response had been presented. The Employment Judge decided the claim on the available material and found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. The respondent was ordered to pay damages of £3,747.00 for that breach.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant a redundancy payment. It ordered the respondent to pay £4,527.63 in respect of redundancy pay.
The unfair dismissal claim was recorded as having been withdrawn and was dismissed. The judgment does not record any separate award for unfair dismissal, and the total monetary award reflected only the breach of contract and redundancy payment sums.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £3,747.00. | Upheld | — | £3,747 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay a redundancy payment and ordered £4,527.63. | Upheld | — | £4,528 |
| Unfair dismissal | The claim had been withdrawn and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,275
- 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.