Case 1800305/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Barnes v Certa Precision Engineering Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 1800305/2025
- Decision date
- 31 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Singh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Barnes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Leeds Employment Tribunal on 9 January 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Singh decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure. The judgment records that the claims were well-founded and succeeded.
The tribunal upheld Mr S Barnes's claims for unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal (notice pay), failure to pay a statutory redundancy payment, failure to pay holiday pay, and failure to provide a written statement of terms and conditions contrary to section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment does not set out a contested liability analysis, and no reasons beyond the rule 22 default determination are given in the extracted text.
Compensation for unfair dismissal, damages for wrongful dismissal, the statutory redundancy payment, holiday pay, and the section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996 claim were not quantified in this judgment. Those matters were expressly left to a later Remedy Hearing, and the respondent was to be allowed to participate only to the extent permitted by the Employment Judge hearing that hearing.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim found well-founded and succeeded. Compensation was left to a Remedy Hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Claim for notice pay found well-founded and succeeded. Damages were left to a Remedy Hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | Failure to pay a statutory redundancy payment was found well-founded and succeeded. The amount was left to a Remedy Hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay holiday pay was found well-founded and succeeded. The amount was left to a Remedy Hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | Failure to provide a written statement of terms and conditions, contrary to section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, was found well-founded and succeeded. Any compensation was left to a Remedy Hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
- Section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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.