Case 3313565/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Tuckey (husband) For the v Blade Contract Services Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3313565/2022
- Decision date
- 21 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Partington Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Tuckey (husband) For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mrs Stephanie Tuckey was dismissed by Blade Contract Services Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) without notice, contrary to her statutory entitlement to 11 weeks' notice. The notice pay for that period was calculated on a net basis at £4,231.26.
The tribunal also found that during the 11-week notice period the claimant obtained alternative employment and received net earnings of £4,303.20. Because those earnings exceeded the notice pay entitlement, the tribunal concluded that there were no outstanding damages owed in respect of notice pay.
No other claims or remedies were recorded in the written judgment. The practical result was that although the lack of notice was identified, no monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant had been dismissed without notice, in breach of her statutory entitlement to 11 weeks' notice, but held that no damages were outstanding because her earnings from alternative employment during that notice period exceeded the notice pay due. | Upheld | — | £0 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £0
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.