Case 2403736/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Sudworth v Elcarbec Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2403736/2024
- Decision date
- 5 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Franey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Sudworth
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge proceeded under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. On that basis, the judgment records awards to the claimant for an unauthorised deduction from wages, unpaid pension contributions deducted from pay, and unpaid accrued untaken annual leave entitlement.
The judgment also records that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awards damages of £953.60, calculated by reference to two weeks' statutory notice at £476.80 per week. The judge noted that the figure was calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant would have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay.
In addition, the tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £953.60. The total gross sum payable to the claimant was £2,795.04.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £642 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract for failing to pay to the relevant pension scheme the contributions deducted from the claimant's pay (February to April 2024). | Upheld | — | £150 |
| Holiday pay | Award for unpaid accrued untaken annual leave entitlement. | Upheld | — | £95 |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay damages were calculated as 2 weeks' statutory notice at £476.80 per week, using gross pay for Post Employment Notice Pay treatment. | Upheld | — | £954 |
| Redundancy | Redundancy payment calculated as 1 x 2 x £476.80. | Upheld | — | £954 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,795
- 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.