Case 2302495/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Miranda v N C Catering Limited and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 2302495/2020
- Decision date
- 4 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Freer Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr E Miranda
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal found that Mr E Miranda was dismissed by the first respondent, N C Catering Limited, in breach of contract in respect of notice, and ordered damages of £5,769.21. It also found that he was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £8,653.86.
The tribunal further held that the first respondent had unfairly dismissed the claimant. For that finding it awarded an additional compensatory award of £500.00 in respect of loss of statutory rights. The judgment does not record any separate basic award, interest, or discrimination findings, and the orders are directed against the first respondent only.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by the first respondent in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £5,769.21. | Upheld | — | £5,769 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and held that he was entitled to a redundancy payment of £8,653.86. | Upheld | — | £8,654 |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that the first respondent had unfairly dismissed the claimant and awarded an additional compensatory award of £500.00 for loss of statutory rights. | Upheld | — | £500 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,923
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £500
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.