Case 1304750/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Kelly-Marie Aston v Sutton Park Catering Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1304750/2021
- Decision date
- 31 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Knowles
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Kelly-Marie Aston
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Kelly-Marie Aston brought claims against Sutton Park Catering Limited for notice pay, a redundancy payment, and failure to be provided a written statement of employment particulars. Employment Judge L Knowles, sitting alone, heard the matter in Birmingham on 28 July 2023.
The tribunal held that the notice pay claim was well founded and awarded £570.24, calculated by reference to four weeks at £142.56 per week. The claim for a redundancy payment was not well founded and was dismissed.
The tribunal also held that the complaint about failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars was well founded and awarded £285.12, calculated by reference to two weeks at £142.56 per week. The respondent was ordered to pay a total of £855.36.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim succeeded; award calculated as 4 weeks at £142.56 per week. | Upheld | — | £570 |
| Redundancy | Claim for a redundancy payment was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Complaint for failure to be provided a written statement of employment particulars succeeded; award calculated as 2 weeks at £142.56 per week. | Upheld | — | £285 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £855
- 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.