Case 2603994/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Beeby v Robinson & Co. Developments Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2603994/2020
- Decision date
- 1 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brewer Representation
- Venue
- Nottingham via Cloud Video Platform
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Beeby
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr A Beeby succeeded in his claim for a statutory redundancy payment against Robinson & Co. Developments Limited. The tribunal recorded that his gross pay was £400.00 per week, he was 26 years old, and he had 4 complete years' continuous service at the effective date of termination, 31 August 2020. On that basis, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £1,600.00 in respect of statutory redundancy pay.
The claimant also succeeded in his claim for unpaid holiday pay. The tribunal found that the respondent's holiday year ran from 1 January to 31 December, that the claimant had taken no holiday by the EDT, and that 8 full months of the holiday year had passed. It held that he had accrued 19 days' holiday under regulations 13 and 13A of the Working Time Regulations 1998, using a daily rate of £65.73, and ordered payment of £1,248.84 for accrued untaken holiday pay.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal awarded statutory redundancy pay of £1,600.00 based on gross pay of £400.00 per week, age 26, and 4 complete years' continuous service at the EDT of 31 August 2020. | Upheld | — | £1,600 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal awarded accrued untaken holiday pay. The extract states that 19 days had accrued and records the sum as £1.248.84; the award is entered here as £1,248.84. | Upheld | — | £1,249 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,849
- 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.