Case 1400844/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Shambrook v Barnstaple Stores Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1400844/2019
- Decision date
- 15 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Shambrook
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal entered judgment under Rule 21 because the time for presenting a response had expired and no valid response had been presented. On that basis, the claimant Ms E Shambrook succeeded in her claim for a statutory redundancy payment, and the tribunal awarded £7,373.52, calculated as 28.5 weeks at £258.72 gross per week.
The claimant also succeeded on her breach of contract claim in respect of the statutory notice period, and the respondent was ordered to pay 12 weeks' notice pay in the net sum of £2,952.00. In addition, the claim for unlawful deduction from wages succeeded and the respondent was ordered to pay two weeks' pay in the gross sum of £517.44.
The claim for accrued but unpaid holiday pay also succeeded, with the tribunal ordering payment of 71 hours' pay in the gross sum of £555.93. The judgment records no respondent response and no further reasoning beyond the Rule 21 determination and the specific monetary awards.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment awarded at 28.5 weeks x £258.72 gross per week. | Upheld | — | £7,374 |
| Breach of contract | Claim succeeded in respect of the claimant's statutory notice period; 12 weeks' notice pay awarded in the net sum of £2,952.00. | Upheld | — | £2,952 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded as two weeks' pay in the gross sum of £517.44. | Upheld | — | £517 |
| Holiday pay | Accrued but unpaid holiday pay awarded as 71 hours' pay in the gross sum of £555.93. | Upheld | — | £556 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,399
- 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.