Case 2301833/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Brett v MB Farms (Produce) Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2301833/2019
- Decision date
- 9 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Corrigan Ashford
- Venue
- Ashford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Brett
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal refused the respondent’s application for an extension of time to submit a response. Judgment was therefore entered in favour of the claimant under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment also amended the respondent’s name to MB Farms (Produce) Ltd.
The claimant’s complaint of wrongful dismissal, described as insufficient notice, succeeded. The tribunal awarded damages of £793.30. It recorded that the award was based on the claimant’s 12-week notice entitlement, with credit given for the month notice period during which she received £574.20 and for state benefits of £511.70 received after dismissal.
The tribunal also held that the claimant had the right to a redundancy payment and ordered the respondent to pay £2,761.50. It stated that the redundancy entitlement was £3,288.60, calculated as 21 multiplied by £156.60, less £704.70 already received. The total payable by the respondent was £3,554.80.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | Successful complaint of wrongful dismissal (insufficient notice). Damages were assessed at £793.30 based on a 12-week notice entitlement, with credit for the month notice period during which the claimant received £574.20 and state benefits of £511.70 after dismissal. | Upheld | — | £793 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal held that the claimant had the right to a redundancy payment of £2,761.50 and ordered the respondent to pay that sum. The amount was based on a redundancy entitlement of £3,288.60 (£156.60 x 21) less £704.70 already received. | Upheld | — | £2,762 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,555
- 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.