Case 1309991/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs E Chetwood v Rhodes Rogers and Jolly Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 1309991/2020
- Decision date
- 27 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wilkinson Representation
- Venue
- The Midlands West
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs E Chetwood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Wilkinson, sitting remotely by CVP at The Midlands West Employment Tribunal on 27 July 2021, decided two monetary heads in favour of Mrs E Chetwood against Rhodes Rogers and Jolly Limited. The judgment records that she was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment of £9,684.00 gross and a statutory notice payment of £7,297.32 gross.
For the redundancy payment, the tribunal deducted sums already paid by the respondent, £6,462.92, and entered judgment for the balance of £3,221.08 gross. For the notice payment, the tribunal deducted £5,654.12 already paid and entered judgment for the balance of £1,643.20 gross.
The judgment states that the total amount awarded to the claimant was £4,864.28 gross. No other claims, remedies, or legal reasoning are set out in the short judgment text beyond those two entitlement findings and the arithmetic leading to the final total.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant entitled to a statutory redundancy payment of £9,684.00 gross, less payments already made of £6,462.92, leaving £3,221.08 gross. | Upheld | — | £3,221 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant entitled to a statutory notice payment of £7,297.32 gross, less payments already made of £5,654.12, leaving £1,643.20 gross. The judgment uses the phrase 'statutory notice payment' and does not further explain the legal basis. | Upheld | — | £1,643 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,864
- 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.