Case 2602470/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Hamesh Raja v Wardwick Drycleaners Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2602470/2019
- Decision date
- 31 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rachel Broughton
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Hamesh Raja
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent filed a response stating that it was not defending the claim and that the claimant's dates of employment and earnings and benefits were correct. The respondent did not attend the hearing. The tribunal proceeded under Rule 21 and gave judgment on 31 January 2020 at Nottingham before Employment Judge Rachel Broughton sitting alone.
The tribunal found that Mr Hamesh Raja had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £5,199, subject to employer deductions for tax. It also found that he was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £8,015.13.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,733, also subject to employer deductions for tax. The total of the monetary awards was £14,947.13.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Awarded as damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice, subject to employer's deductions for tax. | Upheld | — | £5,199 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment in this sum. | Upheld | — | £8,015 |
| Holiday pay | Awarded for unpaid holiday entitlement, subject to employer's deductions for tax. | Upheld | — | £1,733 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,947
- 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.