Case 3300236/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Willis v Knights of Old Limited (in administration), and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 3300236/2025
- Decision date
- 7 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Foxwell Date
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr D Willis
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal had previously made a protective award in favour of the claimant on 20 September 2024, the first respondent's administrators having consented to the claim proceeding. At the date of dismissal the claimant's weekly gross pay was £700.00, giving an entitlement to £9,002.00 of remuneration during the protected period. The claimant had received £5,600.00 on account from the Secretary of State.
The parties were given the opportunity to show cause why judgment should not be entered against the first respondent for the balance of the remuneration due, and no representations were received. The Tribunal therefore ordered the first respondent to pay the claimant the unpaid balance of £3,402.00, with the Recoupment Regulations applying.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Protective award claim. The Tribunal had made a protective award on 20 September 2024; this judgment enters judgment against the first respondent for the unpaid balance (£9,002.00 entitlement less £5,600.00 already received from the Secretary of State = £3,402.00). The Recoupment Regulations apply. Classified as 'redundancy_pay' as the closest match in the locked §4.4 taxonomy for a protective award under TULRCA collective consultation provisions; no precise enum exists for protective awards. | Upheld | — | £3,402 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,402
- 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.