Case 1603473/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Aimee Morgan v M C Morgan Optometrists Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 1603473/2025
- Decision date
- 22 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Moore
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Aimee Morgan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Wales Employment Tribunal on 08 September 2025. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge S Moore decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that Aimee Morgan was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered M C Morgan Optometrists Limited to pay £5,598.00 gross in damages. It also found that she was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £12,362.25.
The tribunal further found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £901.28 gross. The total sum ordered was £18,861.53, with the claimant responsible for any tax and employee national insurance contributions due.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice damages awarded gross. | Upheld | — | £5,598 |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £12,362 |
| Holiday pay | Judgment describes this as failure to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £901 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £18,862
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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.