Case 8001926/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v J.A.M. Drilling Ltd (In Liquidation) — 2025
- Case reference
- 8001926/2024
- Decision date
- 2 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Mackay
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing in Glasgow on 29 April 2025 before Employment Judge R Mackay, the tribunal held that Mr A MacPhee was unfairly dismissed by J.A.M. Drilling Limited (In Liquidation). The written judgment records the outcome in summary form and states that oral reasons were given at the conclusion of the hearing.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay Mr MacPhee a basic award of £10,150 and a compensatory award of £7,281.65. The judgment states that both sums are to be paid without deduction of income tax or national insurance contributions. No separate breakdown, interest award, or other remedy is set out in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The extracted written judgment records the unfair dismissal finding and the awards only. It states that oral reasons were provided at the conclusion of the hearing, but no further written reasoning appears in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | £17,432 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £17,432
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £10,150
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £7,282
- compensatory remedy recorded
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.