Case 2300314/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Rigden v Postsafe South East Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2300314/2023
- Decision date
- 21 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Rigden
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented on 20 January 2023 and the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge therefore proceeded under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 and determined the claim on the papers. The hearing listed for 11 July 2023 was cancelled.
The tribunal found that the claimant, Mr A Rigden, was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment of £10,419.20 gross. That figure was calculated by reference to an effective date of termination of 29 June 2022, the claimant’s age of 40, 20 complete years of service, a multiplier of one week for each year of service aged between 22 and 41, and a gross weekly pay of £520.96.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £5,009.16 net. It further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £2,917.32 gross.
The total sum awarded was £18,345.68.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment awarded gross. | Upheld | — | £10,419 |
| Breach of contract | Damages awarded for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice, stated as net. | Upheld | — | £5,009 |
| Holiday pay | Award for unpaid holiday entitlement, stated as gross. | Upheld | — | £2,917 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £18,346
- 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.