Case 1305893/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Bridgwater v K & B Thomas Removals Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 1305893/2019
- Decision date
- 15 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Meichen Appearances
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Bridgwater
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was heard on 15 November 2019 as a Rule 21 judgment because the respondent had not presented an ET3 and did not attend. The claimant told the tribunal that the respondent’s owner had died and that the company was no longer active; he had been dealing with those handling the respondent’s outstanding business affairs. On the material before it, the tribunal proceeded to determine the claims on the papers and on the claimant’s explanation of the figures.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal accepted that £952 remained outstanding on the redundancy payment after the part payments already made. | Upheld | — | £952 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment refers to this as a claim for 'failure to pay notice pay'; the claimant was allowed to amend to add it, and the tribunal awarded 5 weeks' notice pay at £289 net per week. | Upheld | — | £1,445 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found £88 still outstanding in respect of arrears of wages after the payments made to the claimant. | Upheld | — | £88 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,485
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals 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.