Case 1801421/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 1801421/2023
- Decision date
- 19 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cox Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was made pursuant to Rule 21. The respondent did not attend or have representation at the hearing.
The Tribunal awarded redundancy payments to all five claimants. It also awarded damages for failure to give notice of termination of employment to all five claimants, and accrued holiday pay due on termination to Mrs R Shapcott, Miss E Simpson and Mrs T Wilson.
The Tribunal found that Mr O Duffy and Mr T Bamford were unfairly dismissed, but made no award of compensation for either unfair dismissal claim.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Redundancy payments were awarded to all five claimants. | Upheld | — | £22,724 |
| Breach of contract | Damages were awarded for failure to give notice of termination of employment. | Upheld | — | £7,206 |
| Holiday pay | Accrued holiday pay due on termination was awarded to the first, second and third claimants only. | Upheld | — | £600 |
| Unfair dismissal | The fourth and fifth claimants were found to have been unfairly dismissed, but the Tribunal made no award of compensation. | Upheld | — | £0 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £30,531
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.