Case 1804359/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr P Soni, lay representative — 2024
- Case reference
- 1804359/2023
- Decision date
- 8 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge James Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Sheffield by video link on 8 March 2024, Employment Judge James found that Mr D Olley and Mr T Bothamley were employees of Image Developments (Northern) Limited between 6 December 2011 and 2 November 2022 within s.230 Employment Rights Act 1996. The first respondent was in liquidation, and the Secretary of State for Business and Trade was the second respondent for the purposes of the insolvency payment scheme.
The tribunal held that the claimants were net debtors in the insolvency and were therefore not entitled to payments out of the National Insurance Fund under ss.182 and 184 Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment did not make an actual monetary award. Instead, it recorded that if the claimants had been entitled in principle to any payments, they would have been entitled to 11 weeks' notice pay at £185.76 per week, totalling £2,043.36.
The tribunal also stated that the claimants had been paid any wages due under the contract and had not proven entitlement to any holiday pay. Those findings meant there was no payable award under the insolvency scheme.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay was identified only as a hypothetical entitlement if the claimants had been entitled in principle to payments out of the National Insurance Fund; the tribunal held they were net debtors in the insolvency and therefore not entitled to such payments. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal said the claimants had been paid any wages due under the contract. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimants had not proven entitlement to any holiday pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.230 Employment Rights Act 1996
- ss.182 and 184 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.