Case 2301949/2022 · Employment Tribunal
JENNIFER FOULGER v Newjohn Retailer (walton) Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301949/2022
- Decision date
- 17 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Reed Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
JENNIFER FOULGER
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was determined under rule 21 because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Reed therefore entered judgment on the claim without a contested hearing.
The tribunal held that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of 12 weeks' notice pay. It awarded damages of £2,615.76 gross for that breach.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £4,410.45 gross. The total amount payable was £7,026.21 gross.
The judgment states that the claimant is responsible for any figures owed to HMRC in respect of tax or national insurance contributions.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of 12 weeks' notice pay and awarded damages of £2,615.76 gross. | Upheld | — | £2,616 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment of £4,410.45 gross. | Upheld | — | £4,410 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,026
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.