Case 2303529/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Thompson v Mereworth Pre-School Playgroup CIO — 2023
- Case reference
- 2303529/2022
- Decision date
- 28 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Barker REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Thompson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a consent judgment in a redundancy pay dispute. The claimant, Mrs J Thompson, and the respondent, Mereworth Pre-School Playgroup CIO, agreed that the claimant was owed £1,215.08, being the shortfall in her redundancy payment following the termination of her employment on 9 September 2022. The tribunal recorded that agreement and did not hear evidence on the issue.
The reasons note that the hearing took place at short notice and that the tribunal only had the claim form and response form before it. The respondent was said to be in the process of winding up because of a lack of funds, and Mrs Knox explained that the respondent’s funds had been divided among seven former staff members, leaving a shortfall in each payment.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant had applied to the Insolvency Service and had been told that payment from the statutory fund could only be made if the Employment Tribunal recorded that the respondent had accepted liability. The respondent did accept liability for the £1,215.08 shortfall. The tribunal further noted that if the National Insurance Fund could not act on the consent judgment alone, the claimant could apply to add the Secretary of State as a party and, if necessary, provide documentary evidence of her redundancy payment calculations.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Consent judgment. The respondent accepted that the claimant was owed the shortfall in her redundancy payment. | Settled | — | £1,215 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,215
- 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.