Case 1803202/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Batty v Reliance.com Limited HELD by: CVP — 2021
- Case reference
- 1803202/2021
- Decision date
- 18 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shulman REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs K Batty
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing held by CVP on 12 October 2021 before Employment Judge Shulman, the tribunal recorded a judgment by consent in favour of the claimant, Mrs K Batty. The respondent, Reliance.com Limited, was ordered to pay £7,248.60 in respect of the unfair dismissal claim and the claim for no notice pay.
The judgment does not set out findings on liability or a breakdown of the figure between the two claims. It records only that the payment was made by consent and that the award was a single lump sum covering both claims.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | By consent, the respondent agreed to pay £7,248.60 in respect of this claim and the no-notice-pay claim. The judgment does not allocate any part of the sum to this claim alone. | Settled | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment refers to this as a claim for 'no notice pay'. By consent, the respondent agreed to pay £7,248.60 in respect of this and the unfair dismissal claim, without splitting the sum between them. | Settled | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,249
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.