Case 2303298/2020 · Employment Tribunal
J McDonald v Ivy League Nursery Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2303298/2020
- Decision date
- 3 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Burge Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
J McDonald
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal accepted the respondent's application under rule 20 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 and accepted the response to the claim. The judgment also records that the correct name of the respondent is Ivy League Nursery Ltd.
On the merits, the tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to receive a statutory redundancy payment from the respondent in the sum of £706.32 and ordered payment of that amount. The claimant's claim for unlawful deduction from wages was unsuccessful and was dismissed.
The written record states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the note appended to the decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal held the claimant was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment in the sum of £706.32 and ordered the respondent to pay that amount. | Upheld | — | £706 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim for unlawful deduction from wages was unsuccessful and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £706
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.