Case 3308756/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Hornbees Waste Management Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 3308756/2024
- Decision date
- 18 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn the joined cases 3308756/2024 and 3308757/2024, heard at Watford Employment Tribunal on 30 October 2025 before Employment Judge Alliott, the tribunal first recorded that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claims in time and that they were presented within a reasonable time thereafter. The claimants, Mr Leon Render and Mr Billy Wilson, appeared in person and the respondent, Hornbees Waste Management Ltd, was represented by Mr P Davies, director.
On the substantive claims, the tribunal found that Mr Render and Mr Wilson were each dismissed by reason of redundancy. It ordered the respondent to pay Mr Render the balance of the redundancy payment due in the sum of £945 and Mr Wilson the balance of the redundancy payment due in the sum of £1,050. The written record states that the judgment was approved on 30 October 2025 and sent to the parties on 18 November 2025.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Claim by Mr Leon Render. The tribunal found he was dismissed by reason of redundancy and ordered payment of the balance of the redundancy payment due. | Upheld | — | £945 |
| Redundancy | Claim by Mr Billy Wilson. The tribunal found he was dismissed by reason of redundancy and ordered payment of the balance of the redundancy payment due. | Upheld | — | £1,050 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,995
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time
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.