Case 2300391/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Kay Elliott v Abbey Law Costs Consultants Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2300391/2020
- Decision date
- 13 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Kay Elliott
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a response within the stipulated time, so Employment Judge Martin issued a Rule 21 judgment on the papers. The judgment records that the hearing listed on 22 June 2018 was cancelled.
The tribunal found that Kay Elliott had been dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded her a redundancy payment of £3,375.00. It also upheld her claim for unpaid notice and ordered Abbey Law Costs Consultants Limited to pay £2,250.00 in respect of that claim.
The total sum ordered payable by the respondent was £5,625.00.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment states that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and is entitled to a redundancy payment of 3375.00. | Upheld | — | £3,375 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment describes this as a successful claim for unpaid notice and awards 2250.00. | Upheld | — | £2,250 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,625
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 - 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.