Case 2203381/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Martin v Marylebone Serviced Offices Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2203381/2021
- Decision date
- 16 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Norris
- Venue
- Central London
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Martin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr A Martin’s claims against Marylebone Serviced Offices Limited were heard by Employment Judge Norris sitting alone via CVP at Central London on 16 August 2021. The respondent did not appear, was not represented, and had not presented an ET3.
The judgment states that the claimant’s claims for a redundancy payment, notice pay, pension contributions and holiday pay were not defended. Judgment was therefore entered pursuant to Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £10,544.26, stated to be £8,051.94 net. The judgment does not break that figure down between the individual heads of claim.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment records that the claim for a redundancy payment was not defended. Judgment was entered under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records that the claims for notice pay and pension contributions were not defended. Judgment was entered under Rule 21. The judgment does not split the award between these heads of claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment records that the claim for holiday pay was not defended. Judgment was entered under Rule 21. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,544
- across all upheld claims
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.