Case 2403781/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Holman v Core TV Solutions Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2403781/2023
- Decision date
- 7 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Holman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr M Holman brought a statutory redundancy payment claim against Core TV Solutions Limited. The tribunal amended the respondent’s name to Core TV Solutions Limited and found that the claim was presented within the time limits in section 164 Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed for reason of redundancy on 30 October 2021. Under Part XI of the Employment Rights Act 1996, it held that he was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment.
The award was calculated by reference to 5 weeks at 1 times £544 and 5 weeks at 1.5 times £544, producing figures of £2,720 and £4,080 respectively, and a total redundancy payment of £6,800. The respondent was ordered to pay that sum to the claimant.
A separate notice under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 stated that the relevant decision day was 7 September 2023 and the stipulated interest rate was 8% per annum, but the judgment itself did not make any separate quantified interest award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed for reason of redundancy on 30 October 2021 and was entitled under Part XI ERA 1996 to a statutory redundancy payment of £6,800. | Upheld | — | £6,800 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,800
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 164 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Part XI Employment Rights Act 1996
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.