Case 1403636/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Chapman v G R Pook Engineering Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1403636/2021
- Decision date
- 18 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Scott Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Chapman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mr K Chapman was dismissed by G R Pook Engineering Limited on 7 September 2021 by reason of redundancy. It accepted that his average weekly pay was £440 and that he had 5 years' continuous service, placing him within the statutory redundancy payment entitlement. The tribunal therefore awarded a statutory redundancy payment of £2,200.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed without notice. On that basis it awarded notice pay of £2,200, calculated as 5 weeks' pay at £440 per week. The written judgment records that the respondent will pay both the redundancy payment and the notice pay.
The claimant's holiday pay claim did not proceed to a substantive determination, because it was withdrawn by the claimant. The judgment records that it was dismissed on withdrawal. No other remedies, interest, or additional heads of loss are recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy on 7 September 2021 and was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment of £2,200, calculated on 5 weeks at £440 per week based on 5 years' continuous service. | Upheld | — | £2,200 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed without notice and awarded notice pay of £2,200, calculated as 5 weeks' pay at £440 per week. | Upheld | — | £2,200 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment records that the holiday pay claim was dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,400
- 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.