Case 1402815/2021 · Employment Tribunal
D Stewart v The Palm Indian Restaurant Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1402815/2021
- Decision date
- 7 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Murphy Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
D Stewart
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a liability-only judgment heard remotely on 21 and 22 March 2022 before Employment Judge Murphy. The claimant gave evidence, as did the respondent's director. At the outset, the parties clarified that no constructive unfair dismissal claim was being pursued, that the respondent did not run a Polkey argument, and that there was no allegation of contributory conduct or breach of the ACAS Code.
The tribunal accepted the claimant's case that he had been dismissed, rather than having resigned as the respondent maintained. It declared that he had been unfairly dismissed and also found that the dismissal was by reason of redundancy, so that he had a right to a statutory redundancy payment. The tribunal further held that the respondent had breached the claimant's contract of employment by failing to give the 12 weeks' notice to which he was entitled.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to provide a written statement of employment particulars as required by section 1 ERA, and that this failure had persisted when proceedings were started. No monetary remedy was determined in this judgment. A holiday pay issue was left to be dealt with separately: the tribunal permitted an amendment to the holiday pay claim, reserved judgment on that head, and directed that remedy, if any, would be addressed later.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal declared that the claimant had been unfairly dismissed. The respondent disputed dismissal and said the claimant resigned on 27 April 2021; no constructive dismissal claim was advanced. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and had a right to a statutory redundancy payment. No amount was quantified in this liability judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found a breach of contract in respect of notice pay and held that the claimant was entitled to 12 weeks' notice of termination. No compensation figure was recorded in this judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to provide the claimant with a written statement of employment particulars as required by section 1 ERA, and that the failure persisted when proceedings were initiated. | 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.