Case 2502010/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Darren Allen v Home Fix Computers Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2502010/2023
- Decision date
- 4 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Loy Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Darren Allen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr Darren Allen, brought claims arising from his dismissal by Home Fix Computers Limited. The tribunal, sitting at Newcastle by CVP on 4 April 2024 before Employment Judge Loy, recorded that the respondent did not appear or provide representation.
The tribunal found that Mr Allen was dismissed by reason of redundancy and ordered the respondent to pay a statutory redundancy payment of £7,359.00. The judgment states that this figure was calculated using a multiplier of 16.5 times the claimant's gross weekly salary of £446.00.
The tribunal also found that Mr Allen was dismissed in breach of contract because the respondent failed to pay him for his notice period. It ordered damages of £4,568.64, calculated as 12 weeks' pay at a net weekly rate of £380.72. The total of the two awards was £11,927.64.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and ordered payment of a statutory redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £7,359 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract because the respondent failed to pay notice pay. | Upheld | — | £4,569 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,928
- 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.