Case 2207396/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v (1) Vary Recruitment Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2207396/2020
- Decision date
- 17 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Burns Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr U Bangura, worked as a Security Guard for Chanel in Harrods from 2 October 2013. He was placed on furlough from 23 March 2020 and received furlough pay until 28 August 2020. After that date, the respondent stopped paying him and he did not receive further communication despite trying to get in touch. The respondent did not present a response and did not attend the hearing.
The tribunal treated the claimant as dismissed with effect from 28 August 2020 and calculated his termination entitlements on that basis. It found that he was 40 years old at the time, had six complete years of service, worked 10 hours and 55 minutes per day for five days each week, and had a gross weekly pay rate of £614.06. On that basis, he was entitled to six weeks' notice.
The tribunal ordered notice pay of £3,684.36 gross, to be paid less deductions for tax and NI contributions, and redundancy pay of £3,228.00 tax free. The redundancy payment was calculated as six weeks at the statutory weekly cap of £538.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay ordered as a gross figure, to be paid less deductions for tax and NI contributions. | Upheld | — | £3,684 |
| Redundancy | Redundancy pay ordered tax free and calculated using the statutory weekly cap. | Upheld | — | £3,228 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,912
- 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.