Case 2502351/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Ebblewhite v Panda 818 Ltd and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 2502351/2020
- Decision date
- 17 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Arullendran Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle CFCTC
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr D Ebblewhite
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr D Ebblewhite brought claims against Panda 818 Ltd and Kittie Limited t/a Panda Oriental Buffet Restaurant. The tribunal recorded that all claims against the second respondent were dismissed. It then found the redundancy payment claim well-founded and awarded £6,144.00.
The tribunal also found the notice pay claim well-founded and ordered the first respondent to pay a net payment of 12 weeks' notice pay in the sum of £3,907.68. The separate breach of contract claim was not well-founded and was dismissed.
The written record does not set out any additional reasoning beyond those stated outcomes. The total award recorded by the tribunal was £10,051.68.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £6,144 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment describes this as a claim for notice pay and awards 12 weeks' net notice pay; mapped to wrongful_dismissal as the closest taxonomy fit. | Upheld | — | £3,908 |
| Breach of contract | Separate breach of contract claim dismissed; the written record gives no further factual particulars. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,052
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.