Case 2301982/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Geoff Eyles v HCL Chauffeurs UK Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301982/2024
- Decision date
- 30 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspinall
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Geoff Eyles
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 12 February 2024 and included complaints of unfair dismissal, failure to make a redundancy payment, and breach of contract in respect of notice pay. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Aspinall had previously indicated on 9 April 2024 that a judgment was not appropriate because further information was required to assess compensation for the unfair dismissal complaint.
By letter dated 2 May 2024 the claimant's solicitors withdrew the complaint of unfair dismissal, and that complaint was accordingly dismissed on withdrawal. No further information was required to assess compensation for the remaining complaints, the sums being set out in the claim form.
The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract and ordered the respondent to pay damages of £8,289.00, and that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £16,397.00, giving a total of £24,686.00. The hearing listed on 4 and 5 November 2024 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Withdrawn by the claimant's solicitors by letter dated 2 May 2024; dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Redundancy | Tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment of £16,397.00. | Upheld | — | £16,397 |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim; tribunal awarded damages of £8,289.00 for dismissal in breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £8,289 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £24,686
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 – Rules 21 and 52
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.