Case 1807230/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Downing v BM Retail Limited (In Administration) Heard: BY CVP — 2021
- Case reference
- 1807230/2020
- Decision date
- 3 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Downing
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the remote hearing on 3 August 2021, Employment Judge JM Wade heard sworn evidence from Mrs S Downing. No response had been presented by the return date, and the administrator had consented to the claim proceeding on 22 February 2021. The tribunal issued a Rule 21 judgment and upheld the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, unlawful deduction from wages and breach of contract.
Any other complaints indicated in the claim form were dismissed as outside the tribunal's jurisdiction or misconceived. The tribunal recorded that there was no claim for a protective award in the claim form and said that, had such a claim been presented, the facts described would have given it little or no prospects of success.
On remedy, the tribunal made no basic award because the claimant had received a statutory redundancy payment from the Insolvency Service. It awarded a compensatory award of £12,128, stated that the recoupment regulations did not apply, and made no awards in respect of other claims because any other sums had been paid by the Insolvency Service or were included in the compensatory award.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Determined on a Rule 21 basis after no response was presented by the return date and the administrator had consented to the claim proceeding. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal upheld this complaint, but the compensatory award was not split between the successful claims. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal upheld this complaint, but the compensatory award was not split between the successful claims. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | Any other complaints indicated in the claim form were dismissed as being outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction or misconceived. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,128
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £0
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £12,128
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21
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.