Case 2417621/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Freear v Viking Electronics Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2417621/2020
- Decision date
- 16 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Humble REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Freear
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mrs M Freear was dismissed by reason of redundancy and that she was entitled to a shortfall in redundancy payment of £673.16.
It also found that Viking Electronics Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and had breached the Working Time Regulations by failing to pay accrued holiday pay. The judgment records a single award of £496.02 for those findings and does not split that sum between the two heads.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay a total of £1,169.18. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would only be provided if requested.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a shortfall in redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £673 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages. The judgment does not split the £496.02 award between this head and the holiday pay/WTR head. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found a breach of the Working Time Regulations in respect of failure to pay accrued holiday pay. The judgment does not split the £496.02 award between this head and the wages deduction head. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,169
- 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.