Case 2600297/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Margaret Lewin (1) Mr Joseph Day (2) Mr Joseph Swatland (3) v STA Travel Limited (In Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation) Heard: at Nottingham — 2021
- Case reference
- 2600297/2021
- Decision date
- 3 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Clark
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Margaret Lewin (1) Mr Joseph Day (2) Mr Joseph Swatland (3)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Clark sat alone at Nottingham on 2 December 2021. The respondent did not attend and was not represented. The tribunal struck out each claimant's protective award claim because it had been presented out of time and, on the tribunal's finding, it was not reasonably practicable for the claims to have been presented in time.
The first and second claimants' redundancy payment claims were dismissed upon withdrawal. The tribunal recorded that those claims had already been satisfied by the State so far as the law made the State liable on the respondent's insolvency. The third claimant's redundancy payment claim was also dismissed upon withdrawal, but for a different reason: the tribunal noted that he did not have the necessary qualifying service to accrue a statutory redundancy payment.
The remaining monetary claims for accrued holiday pay, notice pay and arrears of pay were dismissed upon withdrawal for the same insolvency-related reason, namely that they had already been satisfied by the State so far as it was liable in law. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Protective award claims for all three claimants were struck out as presented out of time; the tribunal held it was not reasonably practicable for them to have been presented in time. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | The first and second claimants' redundancy payment claims were dismissed upon withdrawal because those claims had already been satisfied by the State so far as it was liable in law on the respondent's insolvency. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Redundancy | The third claimant's redundancy payment claim was dismissed upon withdrawal after confirmation that he did not have the necessary qualifying service for a statutory redundancy payment. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for accrued holiday pay was dismissed upon withdrawal; the tribunal recorded that it had already been satisfied by the State so far as liability arose in law on insolvency. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The notice pay claim was dismissed upon withdrawal; the tribunal recorded that it had already been satisfied by the State so far as liability arose in law on insolvency. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The arrears of pay claim was dismissed upon withdrawal; the tribunal recorded that it had already been satisfied by the State so far as liability arose in law on insolvency. |
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.