Case 1805926/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Morris v Omnia Protect Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1805926/2021
- Decision date
- 24 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Knowles Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs K Morris
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 24 January 2022, Employment Judge Knowles sat at Leeds by video and gave judgment for Mrs K Morris against Omnia Protect Ltd. The respondent did not attend the hearing. The tribunal held that the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment of £1,384.60.
The tribunal also found that the claimant's claim for unpaid wages was well founded and awarded £692.50. It found that the claimant's breach of contract claim for unpaid notice pay was well founded and awarded damages of £1,217.52.
The tribunal further found that the claimant's claim for unpaid holiday pay was well founded and awarded £138.46. The total monetary award recorded in the judgment was £3,433.08.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal held that the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £1,385 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claimant's claim for unpaid wages was well founded. | Upheld | — | £693 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claimant's breach of contract claim for unpaid notice pay was well founded. | Upheld | — | £1,218 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the claimant's claim for unpaid holiday pay was well founded. | Upheld | — | £138 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,433
- 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.