Case 1404786/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss E Palmer-Horsey v Somerset Gadgets Limited (In Administration) — 2024
- Case reference
- 1404786/2021
- Decision date
- 5 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge D Gray-Jones Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss E Palmer-Horsey
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented on 16 December 2021 after the Claimant, Miss E Palmer-Horsey, was dismissed on 30 September 2021. The Respondent, Somerset Gadgets Limited (In Administration), did not attend or present a valid response. The tribunal recorded that the administrators did not intend to participate or be represented, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under Rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the Respondent unfairly dismissed the Claimant. It also recorded that the holiday pay claim was dismissed on withdrawal. No further reasoning is set out in the written judgment beyond those findings.
The tribunal ordered the Respondent to pay a basic award of £1,632 and a compensatory award of £7,077.08, making a total award of £8,709.08.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £8,709 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the holiday pay claim was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,709
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,632
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £7,077
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.