Case 2415096/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Roberts v Merseyside Network for Change Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2415096/2019
- Decision date
- 28 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Franey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Roberts
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in favour of Mrs S Roberts against Merseyside Network for Change Ltd. The tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages in respect of holiday pay and ordered payment of £445.77 gross.
The tribunal also held that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £3,566.28. The judgment records that this was a net sum, but that it was based on the claimant's gross pay because it was likely to be taxed as Post Employment Notice Pay.
In addition, the tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £5,943.80. The judgment does not set out any further findings or reasons beyond the orders made. The total of the monetary awards is £9,955.85.
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 in respect of holiday pay and ordered payment of the gross sum of £445.77. | Upheld | — | £446 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £3,566.28. The judgment says this is a net sum, calculated by reference to the claimant's gross pay because it is likely to be taxed as Post Employment Notice Pay. | Upheld | — | £3,566 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment of £5,943.80. | Upheld | — | £5,944 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,956
- 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.