Case 1802275/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Watkinson v Panoramic Doors (UK) Limited (in voluntary liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 1802275/2021
- Decision date
- 21 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Eeley
- Venue
- Sheffield via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Watkinson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Sheffield via CVP on 21 July 2021 before Employment Judge Eeley sitting alone. The respondent did not attend and was not represented. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant a total judgment sum of £3,867.17, stated to be net of tax and deductions. The total comprised £1,620 as a redundancy payment, £1,540.80 gross holiday pay, £294 gross unpaid furlough pay, £1,080 gross notice pay, and £50 reimbursement for personal property. No further findings of fact or legal analysis are set out in the extracted judgment.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment records this as a redundancy payment of £1,620. | Upheld | — | £1,620 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment records this as gross holiday pay of £1,540.80. | Upheld | — | £1,541 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records this as gross unpaid furlough pay of £294. | Upheld | — | £294 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records this as gross notice pay of £1,080; the extracted text does not set out any fuller legal label for the claim. | Upheld | — | £1,080 |
| Other | The judgment records £50 as reimbursement for personal property; the extracted text does not specify a more precise legal classification for this item. | Upheld | — | £50 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,867
- 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.