Case 2201652/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M v C Leroy Dailyrare Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2201652/2020
- Decision date
- 2 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was decided in chambers by Employment Judge A M Snelson on 2 September 2020 on reading the papers. The Respondents did not present a response to the claim. On that basis, the Tribunal adjudged that the Claimant was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment of £1,050.
The Tribunal also found the Claimant’s complaint of wrongful dismissal well-founded and ordered the Respondents to pay damages of £25,000.1. The judgment notes that this sum was the maximum awardable under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England & Wales) Order 1994, Article 10.
In addition, the Tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages well-founded and ordered payment of £7,632.50. The judgment states that income tax and national insurance contributions appear to be payable in respect of the award under paragraph (3) only, and that payment of the net sum would discharge the judgment if appropriate deductions and accounting were made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment awarded. | Upheld | — | £1,050 |
| Wrongful dismissal | Damages awarded under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England & Wales) Order 1994, Article 10. | Upheld | — | £25,000 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal noted that income tax and national insurance contributions may be payable on this award only. | Upheld | — | £7,633 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £33,683
- 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.