Case 3300053/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Thomas v Total Home Delivery Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 3300053/2025
- Decision date
- 9 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gordon Walker
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Thomas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal issued a Rule 22 judgment under the Employment Tribunal Rules 2024. The claim form had been sent to the respondent at its registered address or an otherwise appropriate address, and the respondent did not present a response. The claimant provided further information by correspondence to the Tribunal, on the basis of which a determination could properly be made without a hearing.
Employment Judge Gordon Walker found that the claim for a redundancy payment under section 135 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well founded. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £1,400 within 14 days, calculated in accordance with section 162 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. No other claims or remedies were addressed in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Rule 22 judgment. Respondent did not present a response. Redundancy payment calculated under s.162 ERA 1996. | Upheld | — | £1,400 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,400
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- Employment Rights Act 1996 section 135
- Employment Rights Act 1996 section 162
- rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2024
- rule 16 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2024
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.