Case 2400959/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs D Ali v Neil Richardson t/a Neil Hair Design — 2026
- Case reference
- 2400959/2025
- Decision date
- 9 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs D Ali
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs D Ali presented her claim to the North West Employment Tribunal on 19 March 2025. Neil Richardson t/a Neil Hair Design failed to present a valid response in time. Employment Judge Slater decided that part of the claim could properly be determined under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that Mrs Ali was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £5,500. The remaining complaints of unfair dismissal and breach of contract (notice pay) were left for a final hearing, with the date to be notified separately. This judgment did not determine those complaints.
The judgment was approved on 9 July 2026 and sent to the parties on 28 July 2026. The accompanying notice specifies interest at 8% per annum, accruing from 29 July 2026 unless the award is paid in full within 14 days after the judgment was sent. No monetary amount for interest was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £5,500 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,500
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.