Case 8002057/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms D Pavaloi v Bunobair Contracting Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 8002057/2025
- Decision date
- 8 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Doherty
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms D Pavaloi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningNo response had been presented to the claim, so the Employment Judge issued a rule 22 judgment on the available material. The tribunal found that Bunobair Contracting Ltd had unfairly dismissed Ms D Pavaloi and ordered it to pay a monetary award of £8,171.27.
The tribunal also found the respondent was in breach of contract because it failed to give notice of termination of employment. Damages for that breach were assessed at £2,583.33. The judgment does not set out any further reasoning, separate remedy components, or legal analysis beyond the rule 22 disposal.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | No response was presented. The tribunal issued a rule 22 judgment on the available material and found the claimant had been unfairly dismissed. | Upheld | — | £8,171 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent in breach of contract for failing to give notice of termination of employment and awarded damages. | Upheld | — | £2,583 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,755
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.