Case 3303491/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Gina Robinson v Mr Thavarasa Sujanthan — 2025
- Case reference
- 3303491/2024
- Decision date
- 16 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge MJ Smith
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Gina Robinson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn a reserved judgment, the Tribunal found that the claimant's employment had transferred to the respondent under the TUPE Regulations 2006 when he took over Wrentham Stores in February 2024 and that her dismissal a week later was automatically unfair under Regulation 7 because the principal reason for the dismissal was the transfer. The respondent had not produced any evidence of operational need or change.
The Tribunal upheld the claimant's claims for notice pay (statutory notice of three weeks at £130.25 per week, £390.75) and for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars (a section 38 Employment Act 2002 award of £260.50). The claims for redundancy and for holiday pay were not well-founded and were dismissed.
For unfair dismissal the basic award was £586.14 and a further £300 was awarded for loss of statutory rights (£886.14 in total). No compensatory award was made because the claimant found better-paid alternative employment shortly after dismissal and there was no evidence of financial losses. The Recoupment Regulations did not apply.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Automatically unfair dismissal under Regulation 7 TUPE Regulations 2006: principal reason for dismissal was the transfer. Basic award £586.14 plus £300 loss of statutory rights = £886.14. No compensatory award (claimant found better-paying job shortly afterwards). | Upheld | — | £886 |
| Redundancy | Redundancy claim not well-founded and dismissed (reason for dismissal was the transfer, not redundancy). | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Statutory notice pay (notice pay claim) - 3 weeks at £130.25/wk gross = £390.75. | Upheld | — | £391 |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay claim not well-founded and dismissed; claimant unable to detail what leave had or had not been taken in the previous employment year. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Section 38 Employment Act 2002 award of two weeks' pay (£260.50) for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars. | Upheld | — | £261 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,537
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £586
- statutory, unfair dismissal
Legal tests applied
7 references- section 230 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 86 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 139 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Regulation 7 Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006
- Regulation 13 Working Time Regulations 1998
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
- rule 47 Employment Tribunal Procedure 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.