Case 2501327/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Hunter v Sharon Appleton — 2023
- Case reference
- 2501327/2023
- Decision date
- 9 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Hunter
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a video hearing in Newcastle on 9 October 2023, Employment Judge Aspden found that Miss M Hunter was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment. The tribunal also upheld her complaint that Sharon Appleton breached the contract of employment by terminating it without notice, and upheld her complaint for unpaid holiday pay under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £3,584.48 as a statutory redundancy payment, £333.44 as damages for breach of contract, and £312.60 in respect of holiday pay. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal held that the claimant was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £3,584 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the complaint well founded insofar as the respondent terminated the contract without notice. | Upheld | — | £333 |
| Working time regulations | The tribunal found that holiday pay due under regulation 14 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 had not been paid. | Upheld | — | £313 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,231
- 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.