Case 1806633/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Todd v Bonmarche Limited (In Administration) — 2020
- Case reference
- 1806633/2019
- Decision date
- 15 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Todd
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was made under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The Tribunal found that Mrs S Todd was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered Bonmarche Limited (in administration) to pay damages of £1,743.30.
The Tribunal also found that Mrs Todd was unfairly dismissed and ordered the respondent to pay a compensatory award of £2,221. No basic award, interest, or overall total monetary award is recorded in the judgment text.
The Tribunal declared that the respondent failed to comply with the requirements of sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It made a protective award requiring the respondent to pay remuneration to the claimant, who was dismissed as redundant on 29 October 2019, for 90 days beginning on 29 October 2019.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract finding was in respect of notice, with damages ordered in the sum of £1,743.30. | Upheld | — | £1,743 |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment ordered a compensatory award of £2,221 for unfair dismissal. | Upheld | — | £2,221 |
| Other | The Tribunal declared non-compliance with sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and made a protective award of 90 days' remuneration beginning on 29 October 2019; no fixed monetary figure was stated. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21
- sections 188 and 188A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
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.