Case 1403966/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss N McDermott v Mr S Quinn t/a Merry Maids of Exeter — 2021
- Case reference
- 1403966/2020
- Decision date
- 16 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Rourke Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss N McDermott
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Bristol video hearing on 3 June 2021, Employment Judge C H O’Rourke found that Miss N McDermott had been unfairly dismissed by Mr S Quinn t/a Merry Maids of Exeter. The tribunal assessed loss of earnings for the unfair dismissal claim at £262.
The tribunal also found a breach of contract because the respondent failed to pay pay in lieu of notice, and awarded £524 for that head of claim. In addition, it found that the respondent had not paid the claimant her full statutory redundancy pay, leaving £124 outstanding.
The total sum ordered was £910, made up of the three awards above. The claimant’s arrears of holiday pay claim was dismissed upon withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed and assessed loss of earnings at £262. | Upheld | — | £262 |
| Breach of contract | The respondent failed, in breach of contract, to pay pay in lieu of notice. The amount awarded for this head was £524. | Upheld | — | £524 |
| Redundancy | The respondent failed to pay the claimant the full entitlement of statutory redundancy pay, leaving £124 due. | Upheld | — | £124 |
| Holiday pay | The claim for arrears of holiday pay was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £910
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £262
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.