Case 1400749/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Nicholls Repair Shop Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1400749/2023
- Decision date
- 5 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge H Lumby Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Daniel Binks, worked for Nicholls Repair Shop Limited from 15 April 2013 until 29 March 2022 as a sprayer. The respondent closed the business in March 2022, sold off the equipment, and gave the three employees two weeks' notice. The claimant said he was told by Mr Nicholls that he would be given an insolvency number so that he could apply for a redundancy payment, and he chased for that number over a number of weeks before being given the accountant's contact details.
The tribunal found that the claimant did not know at the time that the respondent might itself be liable for a redundancy payment, and that he believed he had six months to bring a claim. On 20 August 2022, after speaking to the accountant, he realised he had been misled and needed to bring a claim. His first tribunal claim was rejected on 8 September 2022 because he had not gone through ACAS early conciliation, after which he completed ACAS early conciliation between 26 January 2023 and 13 February 2023 and presented the claim on 17 February 2023.
Applying section 164 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal held that the claim was outside the initial six-month period from the effective date of termination, which expired on 28 September 2022, but was within the further six-month period in section 164(2). The tribunal exercised its discretion on the basis that it was just and equitable for the claimant to receive a redundancy payment, taking into account the reason for the delay, the respondent's unaddressed case, and the apparent strength of the underlying entitlement. In the alternative, the tribunal held that the respondent's misrepresentations meant time did not begin to run until 20 August 2022, so the claim presented on 17 February 2023 was still within time.
The tribunal calculated the redundancy payment by awarding 12 weeks' pay. It found that all eight complete years of service were worked when the claimant was over 41, giving an entitlement of 12 weeks at his weekly pay of £520, which was below the statutory cap. The resulting statutory redundancy payment was £6,240, and that was the final award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment found to be within time and payable in the amount of £6,240. | Upheld | — | £6,240 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,240
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
6 references- section 164(1) ERA 1996
- section 164(2) ERA 1996
- just and equitable discretion
- Paul v C and J Stone Ltd
- Gadd v Maiseys (Kenilworth) Ltd
- Grimes v Sutton London Borough Council
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.