Case 2403097/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Hawkins v Northern Care Alliance NHS Trust — 2024
- Case reference
- 2403097/2024
- Decision date
- 18 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Childe
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Hawkins
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis is a Rule 21 judgment issued by Employment Judge Childe on 8 October 2024 in the claim of Mr D Hawkins against Northern Care Alliance NHS Trust. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £507.58 as damages for breach of contract.
The figure was calculated using the claimant's gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the sum would be taxable as Post Employment Notice Pay. The calculation applied was a gross monthly wage of £2,199.52 multiplied by 12 months and divided by 52 weeks, producing a gross weekly pay of £507.58. The hearing previously listed on 2 December 2024 was cancelled.
The judgment does not set out detailed reasons or reference any legal tests, consistent with a Rule 21 default judgment. A separate notice was issued regarding interest under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, with the relevant decision day recorded as 17 October 2024 and the stipulated rate of interest at 8% per annum.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Rule 21 judgment. Damages calculated using gross weekly pay (£2,199.52 gross monthly x 12 / 52 = £507.58) to reflect likely tax treatment as Post Employment Notice Pay. | Upheld | — | £508 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £508
- 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.