Case 2407178/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Owen v B & K Ashurst — 2023
- Case reference
- 2407178/2022
- Decision date
- 16 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Owen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge made a determination under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. On that basis, the tribunal found that Mr M Owen had been dismissed by reason of redundancy.
The tribunal held that Mr Owen was entitled to a redundancy payment. The judgment records the amount as £8,545.32. No separate breakdown of any award components is given beyond that figure.
The judgment does not record any other claims, remedies, or contested findings. It also contains a notice about interest under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, but it does not state that any interest amount was awarded in this case.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Under rule 21, the Employment Judge determined the claim on the papers and found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment of £8,545.32. | Upheld | — | £8,545 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,545
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.