Case 3300383/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Nickbaksh v Regency Site Personnel Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) — 2022
- Case reference
- 3300383/2022
- Decision date
- 23 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Nickbaksh
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy a payslip processed on 30 September 2021, the respondent acknowledged contractual and/or statutory liability to pay the claimant gross sums totalling £10,553.23. The tribunal recorded the gross breakdown as redundancy pay of £2,448.00, payment in lieu of annual leave of £3,392.31, notice pay of £3,432.03, and parental pay of £1,280.99.
The judgment was issued under Rule 21. The tribunal stated that the net sum after deductions was £8,952.61, that the respondent had paid only £4,511.00, and ordered payment of the outstanding balance of £4,441.61. No separate split of that balance between the redundancy and breach of contract heads was set out in the reasons.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Rule 21 judgment. The reasons recorded a gross redundancy pay component of £2,448.00 within the sum acknowledged by the respondent, but no separate award was allocated to this head. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal recorded acknowledged contractual and/or statutory liability for payment in lieu of annual leave, notice pay and parental pay, but did not split the final balance between the contractual heads. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,442
- 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.