Case 1804317/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Morris v Aspire-Igen Group Ltd (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 1804317/2023
- Decision date
- 10 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Miller Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Morris
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunals on 13 July 2023. The respondent, Aspire-Igen Group Ltd (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation), failed to present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge determined the claim under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that Ms E Morris was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It therefore awarded her damages of £4,689.28. The judgment records that this figure was calculated using an estimated net monthly pay of £2,810.92.
The judgment also records that the claimant had already received £932.56 compensation from the redundancy payments office, which formed part of the calculation of the final damages figure. No other claims or remedies are identified in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages for that loss. | Upheld | — | £4,689 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,689
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £4,689
- 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.