Case 2500508/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Brown v Margaret Compton trading as Ashbarton Catering — 2022
- Case reference
- 2500508/2022
- Decision date
- 15 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Arullendran Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Brown
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr T Brown presented claims for a redundancy payment and notice pay against Margaret Compton trading as Ashbarton Catering. The respondent filed an ET3 stating that it was not defending the claims, although it said there was a dispute about the date the claimant began employment, which might affect the redundancy payment calculation.
The tribunal dealt with the matter under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, and entered judgment without a hearing on the basis of the information provided by both parties. It found that the claim for a redundancy payment was well-founded and that the claim for notice pay was also well-founded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment states that the claimant's claim for a redundancy payment was well-founded. The respondent did not defend the claim, but there was a dispute as to the date the claimant began employment, which may affect the calculation. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claimant's claim for notice pay was well-founded. No separate monetary figure was recorded in the liability judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.