Case 3200695/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Perkins v Clarity Products Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3200695/2021
- Decision date
- 16 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Taylor Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Perkins
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal gave judgment under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge decided that the claim, or part of it, could properly be determined without a response.
The tribunal found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, had been dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment, and had not been paid holiday entitlement. It ordered the respondent to pay £418.56 gross for notice damages, £627.84 net redundancy payment, and £104.64 gross holiday pay.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £418.56 gross. | Upheld | — | £419 |
| Redundancy | The judgment states the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a net redundancy payment of £627.84. | Upheld | — | £628 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and awarded £104.64 gross. | Upheld | — | £105 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,151
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 Rule 21
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.