Case 3313885/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Employment tribunal upholds breach-of-contract claim against Tom McEwan
The respondent was Tom McEwan. The judgment states that the claimant succeeded on that breach of contract claim and that the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay damages to the claimant in the sum of £2,083.53.
- Case reference
- 3313885/2020
- Decision date
- 29 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Postle Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs H Moon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in which Employment Judge Postle found that Mrs H Moon had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. The respondent was Tom McEwan.
The judgment states that the claimant succeeded on that breach of contract claim and that the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay damages to the claimant in the sum of £2,083.53. No other claims, findings, or remedy components are identified in the extracted text.
The judgment does not set out any separate liability reasoning beyond the finding that the dismissal was in breach of contract as to notice, and it does not record any split between different heads of loss. The award is stated as damages only.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Rule 21 judgment: the tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £2,083.53. | Upheld | — | £2,084 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,084
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.