Case 3305994/2024 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v S Knowles (director of respondent) — 2025
- Case reference
- 3305994/2024
- Decision date
- 3 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anderson Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing in Reading by video on 18 March 2025, Employment Judge Anderson heard the claimant in person and the respondent through S Knowles, director of the respondent. The tribunal recorded that the claimant's claims for unpaid payment in lieu of notice, holiday pay and redundancy pay were well-founded.
The judgment ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £4,888.21. It described that figure as the net sum owed, comprising notice pay, holiday pay and a redundancy payment, as set out in the pay slip dated 9 May 2025. Payment was ordered within 28 days of the date the judgment was sent to the parties.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant's claim for unpaid payment in lieu of notice to be well-founded. The judgment did not split the £4,888.21 between the different heads of claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant's holiday pay claim to be well-founded. The judgment did not split the £4,888.21 between the different heads of claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant's redundancy pay claim to be well-founded. The judgment did not split the £4,888.21 between the different heads of claim. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,888
- 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.