Case 2403648/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Jones Ms N Jones Mrs J Pollitt v Peter Cornelius Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2403648/2023
- Decision date
- 28 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge KM Ross
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Jones Ms N Jones Mrs J Pollitt
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThese were Rule 21 judgments in three related claims brought by Mrs L Jones, Ms N Jones and Mrs J Pollitt against Peter Cornelius Limited. The tribunal determined the claims without a hearing and recorded that each claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and also dismissed by reason of redundancy.
For the notice claims, the tribunal awarded damages calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the sums would be taxed as Post Employment Notice Pay. The awards were £2,332.80 to Mrs L Jones, £380 to Ms N Jones and £703.50 to Mrs J Pollitt.
For the redundancy claims, the tribunal held that each claimant was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment. The awards were £5,443.20 to Mrs L Jones, £570 to Ms N Jones and £1,055.25 to Mrs J Pollitt. The total of the awards made across the three cases was £10,484.75.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Mrs L Jones; dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £2,333 |
| Redundancy | Mrs L Jones; dismissed by reason of redundancy. | Upheld | — | £5,443 |
| Breach of contract | Ms N Jones; dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £380 |
| Redundancy | Ms N Jones; dismissed by reason of redundancy. | Upheld | — | £570 |
| Breach of contract | Mrs J Pollitt; dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £704 |
| Redundancy | Mrs J Pollitt; dismissed by reason of redundancy. | Upheld | — | £1,055 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,485
- 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.