Case 1600454/2023 · Employment Tribunal
IN PERSON FOR THE v No Attendnance — 2024
- Case reference
- 1600454/2023
- Decision date
- 20 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
IN PERSON FOR THE
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 19 February 2024, Employment Judge S Povey heard the case remotely. The tribunal found that four complaints were made out: failure to pay a redundancy payment, wrongful dismissal, failure to pay statutory annual leave entitlement, and unauthorised deductions from wages. The respondent did not attend.
The tribunal ordered the respondent, Thomcatt RGH Limited, to pay the claimant a total of £7,133.35. The award was broken down as £2,855.00 for redundancy payment, £2,483.30 for damages in lieu of notice, £1,265.72 for annual leave entitlement, and £529.33 for unlawful deductions relating to pension contributions. The judgment states that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseeker’s Allowance & Income Support) Regulations 1996 do not apply.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found a failure to pay a redundancy payment; the award was calculated as 5 x £571. | Upheld | — | £2,855 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found wrongful dismissal and awarded damages in lieu of notice, calculated as 5 x £496.66. | Upheld | — | £2,483 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found a failure to pay statutory annual leave entitlement; the award was calculated as 10.97 days x £115.38. | Upheld | — | £1,266 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages, described in the remedy breakdown as pension contributions. | Upheld | — | £529 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,133
- 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.