Case 1305172/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Farrell v One Touch Smart Repair Ltd (in Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 1305172/2020
- Decision date
- 5 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Miller Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Farrell
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 5 January 2021, sitting by CVP at Birmingham before Employment Judge Miller, the tribunal upheld Mr L Farrell’s claims for unfair dismissal, redundancy payment, and breach of contract. The unfair dismissal award was made up of £1,520 for four weeks’ loss of earnings and £400 for loss of statutory rights, producing a total of £1,920 on that claim.
The tribunal also ordered payment of a redundancy payment of £2,400 and, on the breach of contract claim for failure to pay notice pay, a gross sum of £1,920 subject to deductions for tax and national insurance. The written record states that reasons were given orally and does not set out separate written reasons.
For recoupment purposes under regulation 4(3) of the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker’s Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996, the monetary award was recorded as £6,240. The prescribed element was £1,520 for the period 14 March 2020 to 10 April 2020, and the amount by which the monetary award exceeded that prescribed amount was £4,720.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Award comprised £1,520 for 4 weeks' loss of earnings and £400 for loss of statutory rights. | Upheld | — | £1,920 |
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment ordered in the sum of £2,400. | Upheld | — | £2,400 |
| Breach of contract | Gross notice-pay award ordered at £1,920, subject to deductions for tax and national insurance. | Upheld | — | £1,920 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,240
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,920
- 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.