Case 1804377/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs H Thomas v 1616 Media Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1804377/2023
- Decision date
- 5 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs H Thomas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a consent judgment issued by Employment Judge JM Wade sitting in chambers on 5 January 2024. The tribunal recorded that Mrs H Thomas’s complaints of entitlement to a redundancy payment, notice pay, unpaid wages and holiday pay succeeded against 1616 Media Limited.
The judgment does not set out findings of fact or legal reasoning on liability. It simply records that the respondent was to pay the claimant the total gross sum of £5,689.19, as set out in its grounds of resistance.
The judgment also states that the sum is gross and that it is for the claimant, on receipt, to account to HMRC for any tax or national insurance due, if any. No separate apportionment is given between the successful heads of claim.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The consent judgment states that the claimant’s complaint of entitlement to a redundancy payment succeeds. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records that the claimant’s complaint of entitlement to notice pay succeeds; no separate monetary breakdown is given for this head of claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The consent judgment states that the claimant’s complaint of unpaid wages succeeds. The award is not apportioned between the successful heads of claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment records that the claimant’s complaint of holiday pay succeeds. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,689
- 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.