Case 2601446/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Wootton v Sherwood Pines Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 2601446/2021
- Decision date
- 27 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkinson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Wootton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 2 June 2021. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment was issued by Employment Judge Adkinson on 17 November 2021, and all future hearings were cancelled.
On the merits dealt with in the rule 21 judgment, the tribunal found that Miss S Wootton had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded her £3,422.46 gross. It also found that she had been dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £3,581.64 gross.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and awarded £69.76 gross. The total of the monetary awards made in the judgment was £7,073.86 gross.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Awarded as gross sum for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £3,422 |
| Redundancy | Claimant found entitled to a gross redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £3,582 |
| Holiday pay | Respondent found to have failed to pay holiday entitlement; award made gross. | Upheld | — | £70 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,074
- 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.