Case 3304867/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Luke Copeman v Buck Inn Flixton Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 3304867/2025
- Decision date
- 12 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Skehan
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Luke Copeman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal held that Mr Luke Copeman was entitled to a redundancy payment of £469.04 from Buck Inn Flixton Limited. The payment was calculated by reference to his age, weekly gross pay and two full years of service.
The unauthorised deduction from wages/breach of contract claim was well-founded, and the Tribunal awarded £183.04 for salary unpaid for 26 and 27 March 2025. It also awarded £938.08 in respect of Mr Copeman's two-week notice period. The total award was £1,590.16, payable within 14 days of the judgment; the redundancy payment was not subject to tax, while the remainder was calculated using gross figures and any tax payable was the claimant's responsibility.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The redundancy payment was calculated by reference to the claimant's age, weekly gross pay and two full years of service. | Upheld | — | £469 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment described this as an unauthorised deduction from wages/breach of contract claim concerning unpaid salary for 26 and 27 March 2025. | Upheld | — | £183 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded in respect of the claimant's two-week notice period. | Upheld | — | £938 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,590
- 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.