Case 1800161/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Pirrone v Grimes Shellfish Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1800161/2020
- Decision date
- 27 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rogerson Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Pirrone
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a telephone preliminary hearing on 27 April 2020, Employment Judge Rogerson issued a Rule 21 judgment after the respondent had not presented a response. On the available material, the tribunal held that the claimant's complaint for recovery of damages for breach of contract succeeded under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England & Wales) Order 1994.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £1,398.70 net forthwith. The judgment records that the claimant had a contractual notice period of one month, that the contract was terminated without notice on 18 October 2019, and that payment in lieu was made until 30 October 2019. It also records monthly wages of £2,000 gross and £1,595 net, with a daily net rate of £73.61.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Rule 21 judgment at a telephone preliminary hearing on 27 April 2020. The operative order awards £1,398.70 net. The calculation section records a one-month contractual notice period, termination without notice on 18 October 2019, payment in lieu until 30 October 2019, a monthly net wage of £1,595, and a worked figure of £956.93 for 31 October to 18 November 2019; the extracted text does not fully explain how that worked figure relates to the ordered sum. | Upheld | — | £1,399 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,399
- 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.