Case 2601007/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Johnson v Premier Kitchens And Bedrooms (Peterborough) Limited (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2601007/2020
- Decision date
- 21 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rachel Broughton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Johnson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment, with the tribunal determining the claim on the papers. It found that Mr P Johnson had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, and awarded him net damages of £5,052.67.
The tribunal also found that he was dismissed by reason of redundancy, so he was entitled to a redundancy payment of £6,318.67. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,128.67 net.
The judgment records no further reasoning beyond those findings and the three monetary awards. The combined monetary figure from the judgment is £12,500.01.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered net damages of £5,052.67. | Upheld | — | £5,053 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £6,318.67. | Upheld | — | £6,319 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,128.67 net. | Upheld | — | £1,129 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,500
- 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.