Case 1802997/2021 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Mr C Agnew (2) Mr O Bell (3) Mr G Rogers (4) Mrs R Ricks v Christopher Watkins acting as executor of Gordon Watkins (deceased) trading as Ebor Inn Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 — 2022
- Case reference
- 1802997/2021
- Decision date
- 2 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Mr C Agnew (2) Mr O Bell (3) Mr G Rogers (4) Mrs R Ricks
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a judgment by consent under Rule 64. The tribunal recorded that the claims of each claimant for a statutory redundancy payment and for breach of contract, described as notice pay, arrears of pay, or accrued but untaken holiday pay, against the estate of Gordon Watkins (deceased) were well-founded. The judgment does not set out disputed findings or a contested liability analysis because it was made on the parties' written agreement.
The tribunal ordered payment out of the estate to the claimants in respect of all successful claims as follows: Mr Agnew £8,392.80; Mr Bell £5,400.00; Mr Rogers £3,029.13; and Mrs Ricks £4,500.00. The total of the awards is £21,321.93.
For the avoidance of doubt, the judgment dismissed any other claims. It does not specify any further claim types beyond the redundancy payment and breach of contract claims recorded as successful.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment by consent states that each claimant's claim for a statutory redundancy payment against the estate of Gordon Watkins (deceased) is well-founded. The award was not split between claim types. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment by consent states that each claimant's breach of contract claim, described as being in respect of notice pay, arrears of pay or accrued but untaken holiday pay, is well-founded. The award was not split between claim types. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The judgment states that any other claims are dismissed, but it does not identify them separately. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £21,322
- 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.