Case 2500584/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Sayers v The Westgate Fish and Grill Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500584/2023
- Decision date
- 14 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Sayers
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard remotely at Newcastle on 14 September 2023 before Employment Judge Sweeney. The respondent did not attend. The written record states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing, so no written reasons would follow unless requested.
The claimant's wrongful dismissal claim, described in the judgment as a notice pay claim, was dismissed because it was presented outside the statutory time limit. The tribunal held that the claimant had not shown that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim within the statutory period.
The statutory redundancy payment claim under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 succeeded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay a statutory redundancy payment of £2,736, calculated in the judgment as £152 multiplied by 18.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The notice pay claim was presented outside the statutory time limit, and the claimant had not shown that it was not reasonably practicable to present it within time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the statutory redundancy payment claim under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 was well founded and ordered payment of £2,736, calculated as £152 x 18. | Upheld | — | £2,736 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,736
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- not reasonably practicable test
- section 163 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.