Case 2404875/2024 · Employment Tribunal
K McInnes v Amani Distribution Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2404875/2024
- Decision date
- 11 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
K McInnes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to present a valid response on time and Employment Judge K M Ross determined the claim under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024. The judgment addresses three heads of claim brought by the claimant against Amani Distribution Ltd.
The tribunal found the breach of contract complaint relating to notice pay well-founded and ordered damages of £2,060.68, calculated on gross pay to reflect potential tax liability as Post Employment Notice Pay. The claimant was found to have been dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment of £3,091.02. The holiday pay complaint was also well-founded, with the tribunal finding an unauthorised deduction from wages for holidays accrued but not taken at termination, and ordering payment of £515.17 gross.
The total sum payable by the respondent to the claimant under the judgment is £5,666.87. The judgment was approved on 18 February 2025 and sent to the parties on 10 March 2025.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay; calculated on gross pay to reflect possible tax liability as Post Employment Notice Pay. | Upheld | — | £2,061 |
| Redundancy | Tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a statutory redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £3,091 |
| Holiday pay | Characterised by the tribunal as an unauthorised deduction from wages for holiday accrued but not taken on termination; awarded as a gross sum. | Upheld | — | £515 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,667
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024
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.