Case 2410294/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Anthony v Intergalactic Gaming Limited (in voluntary liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2410294/2023
- Decision date
- 22 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shotter Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Anthony
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not enter a response. Employment Judge Shotter recorded that the claimant produced a contract of employment containing clause 7.2, which provided for one month’s contractual notice, increasing by one month for each completed year of service up to a maximum of three months.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant had been employed from 29 July 2021 to 31 May 2023 and had received one month’s pay on termination, but one month of contractual notice pay remained outstanding. It recorded the claimant’s pay as £30,000 gross per year, £23,400 net per year, and £1,950 net per month.
The tribunal found that the respondent was in breach of contract and that the wrongful dismissal claim was well founded. It ordered the respondent, which was in voluntary liquidation, to pay £1,950 net as contractual notice pay. The final hearing listed for 29 February 2024 was taken out of the list.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal said the respondent was in breach of contract and that the claimant’s wrongful dismissal claim was well founded. It awarded contractual notice pay of £1,950 net, representing one month’s notice. | Upheld | — | £1,950 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,950
- 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.