Case 2601192/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Burden v Derby Servicesure Autocentre Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2601192/2021
- Decision date
- 16 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ayre
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Burden
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing in Nottingham before Employment Judge Ayre sitting alone on 15 September 2021. Ms E Burden appeared in person and Derby Servicesure Autocentre Limited was represented by its director, Mr J Hall. The judgment recorded four claims: holiday pay, unfair dismissal, redundancy payment, and notice pay.
All four claims failed. The tribunal held that the holiday pay claim was dismissed, the redundancy payment claim was dismissed, and the notice pay claim was dismissed. On unfair dismissal, the tribunal made a specific finding that Ms Burden was not dismissed by the respondent, so that claim also failed. The written record notes that reasons were given orally and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that Ms Burden was not dismissed by the respondent. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment describes this claim as notice pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.