Case 1803329/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Baker v Orca Doors Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1803329/2022
- Decision date
- 12 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bright Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Baker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunals on 9 July 2022. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract and awarded damages for notice pay in the sum of £3,042.00. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £730.08.
The tribunal further found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £4,563.00. The listed hearing on 28 September 2022 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Awarded as damages for notice pay after the tribunal found the dismissal was in breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £3,042 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £730 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £4,563 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,335
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £3,042
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals 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.