Case 2500349/2023 · Employment Tribunal
1. Mrs C Durkin 2. Mr P Ashley 3. Mr S Sinclair v Dur-Tona (Euro) Design Limited (in liquidation) and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500349/2023
- Decision date
- 5 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rebecca McGregor
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
3 namedClaimant
1. Mrs C Durkin 2. Mr P Ashley 3. Mr S Sinclair
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that the Claimants were employed by the First Respondent under contracts of employment. On a reference under section 170 Employment Rights Act 1996, it determined that the First Respondent was liable to pay an employer's payment within section 166(2)(a), namely a redundancy payment, and that this payment was payable by the Second Respondent.
On the complaint against the Second Respondent under section 188 ERA for payments under section 182 relating to notice pay and holiday pay, the Tribunal declared that the Second Respondent ought to make the appropriate payments to the Claimants. The payments under section 182 were restricted, as claimed and agreed at the hearing, to income paid by PAYE and recorded on the Claimants' P60s.
The Tribunal adjourned the issue of the amounts payable. It stated that the sums payable by the Second Respondent would be determined by agreement between the parties or referred back to the Tribunal for a remedy hearing before Employment Judge McGregor.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The Tribunal determined on a section 170 ERA reference that the First Respondent was liable for an employer's payment, namely a redundancy payment, payable by the Second Respondent. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment refers to payments under section 182 ERA relating to notice pay; no amount was determined in this liability judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment refers to payments under section 182 ERA relating to holiday pay; no amount was determined in this liability judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 170 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 166(2)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 188 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 182 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.