Case 3305606/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Jaswant Singh v The Baker’s Best Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 3305606/2024
- Decision date
- 12 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Andrew Clarke
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Jaswant Singh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Jaswant Singh was employed by The Baker’s Best Ltd from 28 October 2008 until he was summarily dismissed on 21 February 2024. His internal appeal was rejected on 17 April 2024, but the tribunal decided that his employment ended on 21 February 2024, when he was originally dismissed. The claim form presented on 3 June 2024 advanced claims for unfair dismissal, notice pay, and arrears of pay.
Before the May 2025 hearing, the respondent withdrew its ET3 after explaining that the bakery had ceased trading, the business had negligible assets, and its principal witness was seriously unwell. The tribunal entered judgment for the claimant under Rule 22 and also noted that the respondent was no longer contesting any part of the claim. The tribunal accepted evidence that the claimant received a monthly net wage of £3,000, equivalent to £692.31 per week.
On remedy, the tribunal awarded a basic award for unfair dismissal on the basis of 15 complete years of service and the claimant’s age over 41 throughout that service. Using the statutory formula, it calculated the basic award at £15,576.97. It also awarded £8,307.42 for wrongful dismissal, representing 12 weeks of net notice pay, because the claimant should have been dismissed on notice rather than summarily.
The tribunal further found that the claimant had only been paid up to 31 January 2024 and had not been paid for the period 1 to 21 February 2024. It awarded £2,076.92 as net wages for those three weeks, described as recoverable as an unlawful deduction from wages under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The total monetary award recorded in the judgment was £25,961.31.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed and awarded a basic award only. | Upheld | — | £15,577 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal held the claimant was wrongfully dismissed and awarded net wages for the 12-week notice period. | Upheld | — | £8,307 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant had not been paid for 1 to 21 February 2024 and treated that sum as an unlawful deduction from wages under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £2,077 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £25,961
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £15,577
- statutory, unfair dismissal
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.