Case 1302207/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M ROLA v Tnpc global Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1302207/2022
- Decision date
- 3 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Battisby Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M ROLA
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 6 May 2022. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Battisby Date determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The listed hearing on 23 November 2022 was cancelled.
On the merits recorded in the judgment, the tribunal found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It awarded £4,212.54 net, described as 9 weeks' notice.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £5,168. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement of 3 days and ordered £346.14 gross for that sum, with the claimant responsible for any income tax and employee national insurance contributions on the holiday payment. The total payable was £9,726.68.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice; the award was stated as £4,212.54 net for 9 weeks' notice. | Upheld | — | £4,213 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment of £5,168. | Upheld | — | £5,168 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found 3 days' holiday entitlement remained unpaid and ordered £346.14 gross, with tax and employee NI to be accounted for by the claimant. | Upheld | — | £346 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,727
- 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.