Case 3304842/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms I Pruna v SMB Housekeeping Services Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 3304842/2020
- Decision date
- 19 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms I Pruna
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn this Rule 21 judgment, Employment Judge Quill held that Ms I Pruna had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. The tribunal ordered SMB Housekeeping Services Ltd to pay damages of £1,025.05, calculated by reference to one month under clause 9.1(a) and the stated weekly pay figure of £236.55.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy. On that basis, it held that she was entitled to a redundancy payment of £1,419.30, calculated as four years' service past the 42nd birthday at £236.55 x 6.
The claimant was not entitled to an award under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002. The judgment records that the claim was issued on 19 May 2020 and that the statement of employment particulars had been provided before then. The total amount awarded was £2,444.35.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £1,025.05, described as one month under clause 9.1(a). | Upheld | — | £1,025 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and held that she was entitled to a redundancy payment of £1,419.30. | Upheld | — | £1,419 |
| Other | The claimant was not entitled to an award under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 because the statement of employment particulars had been provided before the claim was issued on 19 May 2020. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,444
- 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.