Case 1401438/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Hedges v World Welding Alloys Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1401438/2023
- Decision date
- 20 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Roper Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Hedges
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment. The claim was issued in the Bristol Employment Tribunals on 9 April 2023, and the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge therefore determined the claim on the papers under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal held that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £6,852.00. It also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £13,418.50.
In addition, the tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £115.38. The total sum awarded was £20,385.88. The hearing listed for 2 November 2023 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £6,852.00. | Upheld | — | £6,852 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £13,418.50. | Upheld | — | £13,419 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and awarded £115.38. | Upheld | — | £115 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £20,386
- 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.