Case 2207154/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Selimi v Bakproco Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2207154/2020
- Decision date
- 13 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smailes
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Selimi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mr Selimi had been employed by Bakproco Ltd from 4 April 2004 at the latest and that, after discussions in July 2020 about redundancy, he was dismissed without notice on 31 July 2020. It rejected the respondent's case that the enhanced redundancy sum included pay in lieu of notice, relying on the contemporaneous letters of 31 July, 7 August and 11 August 2020, which treated redundancy pay and notice pay as separate items, and on the claimant's evidence that he had been told he would receive an enhanced redundancy payment of about £20,000 plus notice pay. Applying section 86 ERA, the tribunal held that reasonable notice in the circumstances was 12 weeks and awarded damages for breach of contract.
The respondent accepted that the claimant had never been given a written statement of employment particulars. The tribunal considered it just and equitable to award the maximum additional four weeks' pay under section 38 Employment Act 2002 because the respondent knew of the requirement, had a standard document for other employees, and there was no reason to treat the claimant differently. The formal judgment order awarded £9,183.48 for the notice claim and £2,152.00 under section 38, giving a total award of £11,335.48.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The formal order awards £9,183.48 for dismissal without notice. Paragraph 29 of the reasons gives a different notice-pay figure of £9,184.62. | Upheld | — | £9,183 |
| Other | Additional compensation under section 38 Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars; the respondent accepted that no written statement had been given. | Upheld | — | £2,152 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,335
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- implied contractual right to reasonable notice
- section 86 ERA
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
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.