Case 3300166/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Carter v Knights of Old Limited (in administration), and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 3300166/2025
- Decision date
- 7 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Foxwell Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr M Carter
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal entered judgment against the first respondent, Knights of Old Limited (in administration), for the unpaid balance of remuneration owed to the claimant under a protective award previously made on 20 September 2024. The administrators had consented to the claim proceeding.
At the date of dismissal the claimant's weekly gross pay was £665.00, giving an entitlement to £8,551.90 of remuneration during the protected period. The claimant had received £5,320.00 from the Secretary of State on account, leaving an unpaid balance of £3,231.90.
The parties were given an opportunity to show cause why judgment should not be entered for the balance. No representations were received, and judgment was therefore entered against the first respondent for £3,231.90. The Recoupment Regulations apply.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Protective award claim under TULRCA 1992 following collective redundancy by Knights of Old Limited (in administration). The Tribunal had made a protective award in favour of the claimant on 20 September 2024; this judgment enters judgment against the first respondent for the unpaid balance of remuneration due during the protected period (£8,551.90 entitlement less £5,320.00 already received from the Secretary of State). The Recoupment Regulations apply. Closest fit within the locked §4.4 taxonomy is redundancy_pay; the listing categorises this as a Protective Award. | Upheld | — | £3,232 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,232
- 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.