Case 3306138/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 3306138/2023
- Decision date
- 8 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hunt Appearances
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Watford by CVP before Employment Judge Hunt, the tribunal recorded that the wrongful dismissal and unauthorised deductions from wages claims were withdrawn and therefore dismissed, and the respondent's strike-out application in relation to those claims fell away. The judgment also records that written reasons had been given orally and would follow in writing.
The tribunal held that the claim of unfair dismissal under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well-founded. It also held that the claim for a redundancy payment under Part XI of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well-founded, and that the respondent was in breach of contract by failing to pay the claimant's contractual redundancy payment.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £11,226.72, described as the contractual redundancy payment to which the claimant was entitled. The judgment states that this sum encompassed the statutory redundancy payment and that the statutory redundancy payment reduced the basic award for unfair dismissal to nil under s.122(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, so no further award was made on account of the unfair dismissal claim.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | Dismissed on withdrawal in paragraph 1 of the judgment. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed on withdrawal in paragraph 1 of the judgment. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Found well-founded under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996. No further award was made on account of the unfair dismissal. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | Found well-founded under Part XI of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The monetary award was not separately apportioned between this claim and the contractual redundancy claim. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Found well-founded for failure to pay the claimant's contractual redundancy payment. The tribunal made a single lump-sum award rather than apportioning it between the redundancy and contract claims. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,227
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £0
- statutory, unfair dismissal
Legal tests applied
3 references- Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- Part XI of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.122(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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.