Case 2402884/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Bellis v Alder Spring Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2402884/2021
- Decision date
- 4 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A.M.S. Green
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Bellis
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a judgment by consent in which the tribunal recorded that Mr K Bellis's claims for redundancy pay, notice pay and holiday pay were upheld against Alder Spring Limited. The order required the respondent to pay £9,083.04 in redundancy pay, £4,541.52 in notice pay and £585.72 in holiday pay.
The tribunal also recorded that Mr Bellis's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. A further claim for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars pursuant to section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 was likewise dismissed upon withdrawal. The decision contains no reasoned findings on liability beyond the consent and withdrawal terms set out in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £9,083 |
| Breach of contract | Judgment refers to this as the claimant's notice pay claim; mapped to breach_of_contract because notice pay is not a separate locked claim type. | Upheld | — | £4,542 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £586 |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Claim for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars under Employment Act 2002 section 38; dismissed upon withdrawal by the claimant. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,210
- 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.