Case 2411329/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs P Marsden v Real Estate Agencies Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2411329/2023
- Decision date
- 27 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Holmes Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs P Marsden
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningUnder Rule 21, Employment Judge Holmes amended the respondent's name to Real Estate Agencies Limited and entered judgment for Mrs P Marsden on three monetary claims. On the wages claim, the tribunal found an unauthorised deduction and calculated unpaid overtime by reference to an hourly rate of £10.42, identifying 50 unpaid hours in July 2023 and 21 unpaid hours in August 2023, which produced an award of £739.82.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract without notice and awarded £2,813.40 in damages. It further found that she was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £6,681.82. The awards listed in the judgment total £10,235.04.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages for unpaid overtime. It calculated the sum using an hourly rate of £10.42, comprising 50 unpaid overtime hours in July 2023 (£521) and 21 unpaid overtime hours in August 2023 (£218.82). | Upheld | — | £740 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract without notice and awarded damages in the gross sum of £2,813.40. | Upheld | — | £2,813 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment of £6,681.82. | Upheld | — | £6,682 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,235
- 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.