Case 1807684/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms D Hall v Gander Group Messingham Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1807684/2023
- Decision date
- 13 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms D Hall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 28 October 2023. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge determined the claim under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The listed hearing on 16 February 2024 was cancelled as a result.
On the material findings, the tribunal held that Ms D Hall had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It awarded her damages in the net sum of £1,400 for that claim. The tribunal also found that she was dismissed by reason of redundancy and held that she was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,100.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £1,400 net. | Upheld | — | £1,400 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £2,100. | Upheld | — | £2,100 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,500
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.