Case 1402792/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Glenn Philipps v AND Mr Keith D Twitchett Trading as The Plume of Feathers — 2022
- Case reference
- 1402792/2021
- Decision date
- 18 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Glenn Philipps
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent indicated that he did not resist the claims, and the tribunal issued a Rule 21 judgment on 12 January 2022. It held that Mr Glenn Philipps was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment.
The tribunal also held that the claimant's breach of contract claim succeeded in respect of notice pay, and that his claim for accrued but unpaid holiday pay succeeded. The judgment did not quantify any sums; it stated that the appropriate remedy would be determined at the hearing listed for 4 February 2022.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Rule 21 judgment: the respondent indicated that he did not resist the claim. The tribunal held that the claimant is entitled to a statutory redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim succeeded in respect of notice pay. No monetary figure is fixed in this judgment; remedy was left to the later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for accrued but unpaid holiday pay succeeded. No monetary figure is fixed in this judgment; remedy was left to the later hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.