Case 1402695/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Luis Cefla Silva v Bailey Fabrications Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 1402695/2025
- Decision date
- 5 May 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cadney
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Luis Cefla Silva
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBailey Fabrications Limited did not present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Cadney decided that the claim, or part of it, could properly be determined under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The Tribunal found that Luis Cefla Silva was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £5,132.04 in damages. It also found that he was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £6,471, and that the respondent had failed to pay his holiday entitlement, for which it awarded £85.53. The judgment states a total payment of £11,517.51, although the three individual awards stated in the judgment add up to £11,688.57.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £5,132 |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £6,471 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment awards £85.53 for unpaid holiday entitlement. The three stated awards total £11,688.57, which does not match the judgment's stated total of £11,517.51. | Upheld | — | £86 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,518
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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.