Case 3202064/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Dawn Barrs v Your Staff Solutions (in administration) — 2025
- Case reference
- 3202064/2024
- Decision date
- 23 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G. King Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Dawn Barrs
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was heard by Employment Judge G. King at the East London Hearing Centre via CVP on 23 May 2025. The claimant, Mrs Dawn Barrs, was represented by Ms O. McGee. The respondent, Your Staff Solutions (in administration), did not attend.
The tribunal found the claimant's redundancy payment claim well-founded and ordered the respondent to pay £9,300.00. The claimant's notice pay claim was also found well-founded, with £3,720.00 awarded subject to deductions for tax and National Insurance. The claim in respect of arrears of pay was found not well-founded and was dismissed.
The claimant's application for a Costs Order was refused. Reasons were given orally at the hearing; written reasons will only be provided on request within 14 days of the written record.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Tribunal found the redundancy payment claim well-founded; respondent ordered to pay £9,300.00. | Upheld | — | £9,300 |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim found well-founded; £3,720.00 awarded, subject to deductions for tax and National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £3,720 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim in respect of arrears of pay was found not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,020
- 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.