Case 2401471/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Nicholson v Ricki Bibi and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 2401471/2023
- Decision date
- 23 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Franey Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs L Nicholson
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningRegional Employment Judge Franey made a Rule 21 judgment after the second respondent failed to present a valid response on time. All claims against the first respondent, Ricki Bibi, were dismissed because she was not the employer.
As to Norens Limited, the tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £1,801.80 for 7 weeks of the notice period that was not worked. It also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and therefore entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,059.20.
The tribunal further found that the second respondent had not paid the claimant’s accrued untaken annual leave entitlement of 6 days and ordered payment of £415.80. The awards made in the judgment totalled £4,276.80.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Damages for 7 weeks of notice period not worked. | Upheld | — | £1,802 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy. | Upheld | — | £2,059 |
| Holiday pay | Award for 6 days of accrued untaken annual leave. | Upheld | — | £416 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,277
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21, 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.