Case 2204568/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Helen Parker Herman v Beauty Consultants Bureau (UK) LLP — 2021
- Case reference
- 2204568/2020
- Decision date
- 17 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wade Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Helen Parker Herman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Wade determined the case under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to file an ET3 grounds of resistance. The tribunal considered the ET1 without a hearing and cancelled the hearing listed for 27 September 2021 to 1 October 2021.
The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay monies owed to the claimant and ordered payment of £17,835.00. That sum comprised a statutory redundancy payment of £9,135.00, notice pay of £5,220.00, and arrears of pay from 1 to 30 March 2020 of £3,480.00. The respondent was also directed to account to HMRC for the tax and national insurance due on the arrears of pay.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment ordered in the judgment. | Upheld | — | £9,135 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded as notice pay; the extracted judgment does not state a separate legal label for this head of loss. | Upheld | — | £5,220 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded as arrears of pay from 1 to 30 March 2020; the extracted judgment does not state a separate statutory label for this head of loss. | Upheld | — | £3,480 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £17,835
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.