Case 1801515/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Pepper v North Star Investment Management Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1801515/2023
- Decision date
- 26 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Pepper
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunal on 4 April 2023 and the respondent did not present a valid response on time. The tribunal therefore made a determination under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. It also substituted North Star Investment Management Limited as the correct respondent, being satisfied on the claimant's representations that it was his employer and that the claim had reached the company because it was served at the registered office.
On the merits, the tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant damages of £2,000, and stated that the claimant would be responsible for any tax or national insurance due on that amount. The hearing listed for 30 May 2023 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £2,000. The judgment does not separate the award into distinct heads. | Upheld | — | £2,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,000
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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.