Case 1401177/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Darren Wood v Parkstone Removals Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1401177/2021
- Decision date
- 16 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Darren Wood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not defend the claimant’s claims for redundancy pay and notice. Employment Judge Midgley recorded that both claims were well founded.
The tribunal awarded redundancy pay of £4,612.50. The figure was calculated on the basis set out in the judgment: 1.5 x 10 x £307.50.
The tribunal also awarded notice pay of £553.50. The judgment explains that this was calculated by taking 9 weeks at the full contractual rate of £307.50 a week, giving £2,767.50, and deducting payment already made of £2,214.00.
The written record notes that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The total of the sums ordered is £5,166.00.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The respondent did not defend the redundancy pay claim. The tribunal found it well founded and awarded £4,612.50, calculated as 1.5 x 10 x £307.50. | Upheld | — | £4,613 |
| Breach of contract | The respondent did not defend the notice claim. The tribunal found it well founded and awarded £553.50, being 9 weeks at the contractual rate of £307.50 a week (£2,767.50) less payment of £2,214.00. | Upheld | — | £554 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,166
- 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.