Case 2500508/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Alan Suddick v Elite Health & Fitness Sunderland Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2500508/2020
- Decision date
- 12 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Alan Suddick
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with the case under Rule 21 because the respondent did not present a response, despite an extension of time to 14 May 2020. A telephone preliminary hearing was held on 12 June 2020, at which the claimant was represented by Sunderland Welfare Rights Centre. The tribunal recorded that the claimant, Alan Suddick, had been employed by Elite Health & Fitness Sunderland Ltd from 1 October 2011 until 21 December 2019 and was dismissed without notice by reason of redundancy.
The tribunal was satisfied on the available material that the claimant was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment, accrued but untaken holiday pay, and damages for breach of contract in respect of the failure to give eight weeks' notice. It found that at the date of dismissal he had eight complete years of service, was aged 45, had a gross weekly pay of £180, and had accrued seven days of untaken holiday worth £180 gross. It also found that he was told the business was ceasing to trade with immediate effect and that he was given no notice and no payment for outstanding holiday.
The judgment ordered payment of £1,880 for the redundancy payment, £180 for holiday pay, and £1,440 in damages for breach of contract, producing a total amount payable of £3,500.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996; the tribunal found the claim well founded and ordered payment of £1,880. | Upheld | — | £1,880 |
| Holiday pay | Accrued but untaken holiday pay under Regulation 30 Working Time Regulations; the tribunal found the claim well founded and ordered payment of £180. | Upheld | — | £180 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract claim for failure to give 8 weeks' notice; the tribunal found the claim well founded and awarded damages of £1,440. | Upheld | — | £1,440 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,500
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Regulation 30 Working Time Regulations
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.