Case 3202443/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Freeman v FIRMA Foreign Exchange Corporation (UK) Limited and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 3202443/2023
- Decision date
- 21 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jones Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr J Freeman
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 13 December 2023 and the Respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge therefore made a determination under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On the papers, the tribunal found that the Respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the Claimant's wages, that the Claimant had been automatically unfairly dismissed, and that the Claimant had been dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment. The tribunal also found that the Respondent had failed to comply with the statutory requirements to elect and/or consult with employee representatives.
The judgment records that the claim succeeds and that the remedy due to the Claimant will be determined at a Remedy Hearing. No monetary award is quantified in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the Respondent made unauthorised deductions from the Claimant's wages. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the Claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment states that the Claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and is entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The judgment states that the Respondent failed to comply with the statutory requirements to elect and/or consult with employee representatives. | Upheld | — | — |
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.