Case 2600795/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Chappell v RSL Distribution Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 2600795/2022
- Decision date
- 29 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkinson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Chappell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Judge determined the case under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The judgment was therefore made on the papers and no future hearings were required.
The tribunal held that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £6,602.76 gross. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, and awarded damages of £2,383.67.
The tribunal further found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £4,960. The awards together produced a total sum of £13,946.43.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Award stated as gross. | Upheld | — | £6,603 |
| Breach of contract | Breach of contract in respect of notice; damages awarded. | Upheld | — | £2,384 |
| Redundancy | Tribunal found the dismissal was by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £4,960 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,946
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.