No appearance For the v Miss S Kaur (lay representative) — 2025

The hearing proceeded in the respondent's absence after the tribunal considered the available information under Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024. The respondent had not lodged a timely response, did not provide a bundle, and did not join the hearing. The tribunal noted that the parties had been trying to settle the matter, but no settlement had been reached, so it proceeded with the hearing. It accepted that the claimant had been employed as a warehouse worker and that the dismissal date was 10 May 2024.

On liability, the tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed because the respondent did not provide a potentially fair reason for dismissal. It awarded a basic award of £1,091.08 based on the claimant's age, service and gross weekly pay of £545.54, and recorded that this duplicated his redundancy claim. The claimant did not seek a compensatory award.

The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract and without notice. It accepted that he was entitled to one month's gross notice pay of £2,364.00. It further found that the whistleblowing complaint failed because it related to a complaint made after dismissal about the employment of illegal immigrants and lacked the necessary causal link required for a protected disclosure claim. The recoupment regulations did not apply because the claimant did not receive state benefits.