Case 2306279/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Downe v Nova Prop Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2306279/2023
- Decision date
- 1 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ramsden Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Downe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 15 November 2023 and the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge proceeded under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 and determined the claim on the papers. The listed hearing on 19 March 2024 was cancelled.
The tribunal found that Mr C Downe had been dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £3,858.00 gross. The judgment states that this was calculated using statutory redundancy weekly pay of £643 multiplied by 6 years of continuous employment.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £2,538.47 gross, calculated using gross weekly pay of £1,153.85 multiplied by 2.2 weeks. The total sum payable under the judgment was £6,396.47, and the claimant was directed to account to HMRC for any sums owed in respect of payment received pursuant to the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment calculated as statutory redundancy weekly pay of £643 multiplied by 6 years of continuous employment. | Upheld | — | £3,858 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £2,538.47 gross, calculated using gross weekly pay of £1,153.85 x 2.2 weeks. | Upheld | — | £2,538 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,396
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.