Case 3200940/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms R Valiant v People Tree Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3200940/2023
- Decision date
- 3 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Emery REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms R Valiant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal, sitting at East London Hearing Centre by CVP on 3 October 2023, determined under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 that Ms R Valiant was entitled to a redundancy payment from People Tree Ltd. The respondent did not appear or have representation.
The Tribunal recorded a start date of 2 January 2007, an effective date of termination of 9 April 2023, age 58 at dismissal, annual salary of £31,000, and weekly gross salary of £596.17. On that basis, it calculated the redundancy payment as 16 years' employment multiplied by 1.5 and by the weekly gross salary, producing £14,308.08.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The Tribunal determined under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 that the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment. The calculation used a start date of 2 January 2007, an effective date of termination of 9 April 2023, age 58, annual salary of £31,000, and weekly gross salary of £596.17. | Upheld | — | £14,308 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,308
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.