Case 3303093/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Walsh v Envirotec Integrated Services Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3303093/2020
- Decision date
- 3 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hawksworth
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Walsh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment by Employment Judge Hawksworth. The tribunal recorded that the correct name of the respondent employer was Envirotec Integrated Services Limited.
The claimant, Mr Walsh, was found to have been dismissed by reason of redundancy and was awarded a redundancy payment of £9,964.50, payable in full.
The tribunal also found that the dismissal was in breach of contract because Mr Walsh was given one week's notice when he was entitled to 12 weeks' notice. Damages for notice were awarded in the gross sum of £5,628.48, with the usual tax and national insurance direction noted in the judgment.
Finally, the tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It recorded that he had 17 days of accrued untaken holiday, calculated at £10.66 per hour for an 8 hour day, and ordered payment of £1,449.76 gross. The total of the awards was £17,042.74.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment in full. | Upheld | — | £9,965 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent dismissed the claimant in breach of contract in respect of notice; he was given one week's notice but was entitled to 12 weeks' notice. | Upheld | — | £5,628 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay accrued untaken holiday entitlement of 17 days. | Upheld | — | £1,450 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £17,043
- 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.