Case 3305640/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Senthil Palaneappan v Gravitilab Aerospace Services Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 3305640/2024
- Decision date
- 11 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Senthil Palaneappan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and awarded £2,500.00. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and awarded £576.92.
The tribunal further found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice pay and awarded damages of £2,307.69. It also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £1,153.85.
The judgment stated that the total amount payable was £6,538.46, with the sums for wages, holiday pay and notice pay stated to be subject to tax and National Insurance.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £2,500 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £577 |
| Breach of contract | Judgment states dismissal was in breach of contract in respect of notice pay, with damages awarded. | Upheld | — | £2,308 |
| Redundancy | Judgment states the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £1,154 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,538
- 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.