Case 3213638/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Nigel Stanley Kathleen Hunter v Stratsmore Investments Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3213638/2020
- Decision date
- 11 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Knight Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Nigel Stanley Kathleen Hunter
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe First Claimant, Nigel Stanley Kathleen Hunter, worked for Stratsmore Investments Limited from 24 April 2014 to 15 September 2020 as a Bar Manager on 34 hours a week. During the COVID-19 period he was placed on furlough, was told on 12 August 2020 to prepare for reopening on 24 August 2020, and then received a letter on 15 September 2020, dated 1 September 2020 and posted on 14 September 2020, stating that he was being made redundant with immediate effect. The tribunal found there was a genuine redundancy situation and that redundancy was the reason for dismissal.
Applying sections 94 and 98 ERA 1996, the tribunal held that the dismissal procedure was plainly unfair because the claimant was told of the redundancy only when the dismissal letter arrived, without prior notice of the redundancy situation. It therefore upheld the unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal also held that, because the claimant had six years' service and received no notice, the respondent was in breach of contract in respect of 6 weeks' notice pay.
The tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to 9 weeks' redundancy pay, but no separate award was made for that head because it was covered by the basic award. It also found 4 days' untaken holiday and 28 unpaid hours of work, together with 2 weeks' furlough pay, and awarded holiday pay of £213.60 and arrears of wages of £753.88. For unfair dismissal, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £2,403 and a compensatory award of £500, giving £2,903 for that claim and a total award of £5,472.48 overall. The Second Claimant's claim was postponed because the version of the ET1 before the tribunal did not contain enough information to determine it.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissal found unfair; the tribunal awarded a basic award of £2,403 and a compensatory award of £500, making £2,903 in total for this claim. | Upheld | — | £2,903 |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay for 6 weeks, calculated at £1,602. | Upheld | — | £1,602 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to 9 weeks' redundancy pay (£2,403), but no separate award was made because that sum was covered by the basic award for unfair dismissal. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Outstanding holiday entitlement of 4 days, assessed at 4/5 of a week's pay. | Upheld | — | £214 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Arrears of wages for 28 unpaid hours and 2 weeks' furlough pay. | Upheld | — | £754 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,472
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,403
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £500
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.94 ERA 1996
- s.98(1) and s.98(4) ERA 1996
- s.139 ERA 1996
- sections 13 to 27B ERA 1996
- rule 47 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure
- Roberts v Skelmersdale College [2004] IRLR 69
- rule 2 overriding objective
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.