Case 1600293/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Carpenter v Reflex Sales & Marketing Ltd (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 1600293/2024
- Decision date
- 30 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brace Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Carpenter
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Wales Employment Tribunals on 23 January 2024. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the matter under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment therefore proceeded on the papers rather than by way of a contested response from the respondent.
The tribunal found that Mrs C Carpenter had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £3,720.00. It also found that she was dismissed by reason of redundancy and that she was entitled to a redundancy payment of £3,433.80.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £7,153.80 in total. The judgment does not record any separate award of interest or any other remedy heads beyond the breach of contract damages and redundancy payment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £3,720.00. | Upheld | — | £3,720 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £3,433.80. | Upheld | — | £3,434 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,154
- 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.