Case 3200490/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Johnson v Laindon Community Association — 2021
- Case reference
- 3200490/2021
- Decision date
- 6 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Knight Representation
- Venue
- London East Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Johnson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 6 August 2021 before Employment Judge S Knight, the tribunal amended the respondent’s name to Laindon Community Association and extended time for the claims relating to holiday pay and notice pay to the date the ET1 was filed. It struck out the unfair dismissal claim.
The tribunal then found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages in respect of holiday pay, that the claimant was owed notice pay, and that she was owed a redundancy payment.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay a total of £2,332.60, made up of £436 for holiday pay, £784.80 for notice pay, and £1,111.80 for redundancy pay. The judgment did not record any separate basic award, compensatory award, injury to feelings, or interest.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the unfair dismissal claim was struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages in respect of holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £436 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found that the claimant was owed notice pay. | Upheld | — | £785 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found that the claimant was owed a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £1,112 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,333
- 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.