Case 2501732/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Wrightson v Rise Elevator Limited (in voluntary liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2501732/2023
- Decision date
- 20 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Legard
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Wrightson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr C Wrightson claimed notice pay, car allowance, unpaid employer pension contributions and a quarterly bonus arising from his role as managing director of Rise Elevator Limited. The respondent did not attend and was not represented. The tribunal found the claimant's evidence on the balance of probabilities and accepted that his employment ended on 1 March 2023 when Rise was already in serious financial difficulty.
The tribunal held that the claimant had not waived his contractual notice rights and had expressly said that all employees' notice periods, including his own, should be honoured. It therefore awarded three months' notice pay of £15,000 gross. It also found that he proved entitlement to company car allowance and employer pension contributions for the same period, awarding £1,800 and £750 respectively. The judgment notes that the notice-pay award was gross and that any tax position would need to be dealt with if the award was enforced.
The quarterly bonus claim, pleaded at £13,500, was dismissed. The tribunal said it lacked the evidence needed to make a finding or perform a calculation, and it accepted that Rise was in serious financial difficulty by the end of February 2023 and had needed a loan to meet salary shortfalls. The tribunal also dismissed the respondent's contract claim, which alleged unauthorised or fraudulent payments to the claimant from company funds, finding it without foundation. The claimant's TUPE regulation 15 consultation claim was withdrawn and dismissed on that basis.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The claimant said he no longer wished to pursue the regulation 15 TUPE consultation claim; it was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay for three months, awarded gross. The tribunal found the claimant had not waived his notice entitlement and had expressly said all notice periods should be honoured. | Upheld | — | £15,000 |
| Breach of contract | Company car allowance for the same three-month period. | Upheld | — | £1,800 |
| Breach of contract | Employer pension contributions for the same three-month period. | Upheld | — | £750 |
| Breach of contract | Unpaid quarterly bonus claim. The tribunal said there was insufficient evidence to make a finding or calculate any award, and it considered it inconceivable that the company could have paid bonuses in its financial position. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Respondent's contract claim alleging unauthorised or fraudulent payments out of company funds. It was not pursued at the hearing and the tribunal found it without foundation. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £17,550
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- balance of probabilities
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.