Case 2419566/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Wells v Kitchen Specialists Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2419566/2020
- Decision date
- 1 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Warren REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Wells
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 21 June 2021, the claimant appeared in person and the respondent did not attend, having indicated it would not be attending. The tribunal allowed the claimant to amend his claim to include an allegation of unlawful deduction from wages in respect of unpaid annual leave on dismissal.
The tribunal found that the claimant had been made redundant. On that basis, it held that he was entitled to a redundancy payment in the sum of £3,000.
The tribunal also found that, at the time of dismissal for redundancy, the claimant had accrued unpaid annual leave. It awarded him £852.60 net of tax and national insurance in respect of that entitlement. The judgment records that recoupment does not apply.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was made redundant and entitled to a redundancy payment of £3,000. | Upheld | — | £3,000 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal allowed amendment to include an unlawful deduction from wages / unpaid annual leave claim and awarded £852.60 net for accrued untaken annual leave on dismissal. | Upheld | — | £853 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,853
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.