Case 2201998/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v NW1 Clubs Ltd (in liquidation) — 2019
- Case reference
- 2201998/2019
- Decision date
- 27 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Burns DEFAULT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a rule 21 default judgment because the respondent failed to file an ET3 Grounds of Resistance. Employment Judge E Burns determined the claim on the ET1 without a hearing and cancelled the listed hearing for 29 November 2019.
The tribunal found that the claimant’s employment ended on 8 February 2019 and that he had five years’ continuous service, with previous service with associated companies of the respondent counting for that purpose. It also found that the claimant was 22 at the date of dismissal.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay a statutory redundancy payment. It calculated entitlement at 2.5 weeks’ pay, capped at the statutory maximum of £508 as at 8 February 2019, producing a total award of £1,270 gross. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay that sum to the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Default judgment under rule 21. The tribunal found the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay a statutory redundancy payment and calculated entitlement at 2.5 weeks' pay capped at £508 per week, totalling £1,270 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,270 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,270
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.