Case 2409605/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Amanda Carnegie v Valves and Engineered Products Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2409605/2022
- Decision date
- 30 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rhodes Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Amanda Carnegie
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Manchester on 20 and 21 March 2023, Employment Judge Rhodes recorded that Amanda Carnegie’s claim for a statutory redundancy payment succeeded. The respondent, Valves and Engineered Products Limited, was ordered to pay £6,665.
The complaint of unfair dismissal also succeeded. The tribunal awarded a compensatory award of £2,762.58 and stated that no basic award was made because of the award of a statutory redundancy payment.
The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages succeeded as well, and the respondent was ordered to pay £1,800 gross. The judgment is a short reasons-free written record of decision and does not set out further findings of fact or legal reasoning beyond the orders made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment records that the claim for a statutory redundancy payment succeeded and ordered payment of £6,665. | Upheld | — | £6,665 |
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint succeeded; the tribunal awarded a compensatory award of £2,762.58 and made no basic award because of the statutory redundancy payment award. | Upheld | — | £2,763 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as a complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages and orders payment of £1,800 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,800 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,228
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £2,763
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.