Case 2305261/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Sandra Scott v John David Green — 2021
- Case reference
- 2305261/2020
- Decision date
- 14 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Sandra Scott
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment because the respondent did not defend the claim. The tribunal found that Ms Sandra Scott had been dismissed by reason of redundancy and ordered the respondent to pay a redundancy payment of £8,115.63.
The tribunal also found that John David Green had breached the contract of employment by not paying notice and ordered payment of £6,675.00. A further award of £1,004.50 was made, but the extracted text does not state the legal label for that sum.
The judgment records a total amount payable of £12,795.13 and notes that the hearing listed for 27 September 2021 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The extracted text says the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and is entitled to a redundancy payment. The amount appears in the text as '£8.115.63'; this has been normalised to £8,115.63 because it matches the stated total payable. | Upheld | — | £8,116 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent breached the contract of employment by not paying notice and ordered payment of £6,675.00. | Upheld | — | £6,675 |
| Working time regulations | The extracted text orders a further payment of £1,004.50 but does not label the legal basis for that sum. It is classified here as working_time because the listing categories include Working Time Regulations and no other claim type is identified in the text. | Upheld | — | £1,005 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,795
- 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.