Case 3314888/2019 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Muksha UK Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 3314888/2019
- Decision date
- 11 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bartlett
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Bartlett, sitting alone at Watford on 11 February 2020, found that the claimant was dismissed for reason of redundancy and that redundancy was a fair reason for dismissal. The claimant was awarded a redundancy payment of £1,330.
The tribunal also held that the dismissal was procedurally unfair and awarded £177 compensation for that unfair dismissal. It found for the claimant on her breach of contract claim for non-payment of notice pay and awarded £1,741.80 as compensation for that breach.
The claimant's claim for non-payment of holiday also succeeded, with £1,393.65 awarded for unpaid holiday pay. The tribunal recorded the total monetary award as £4,642.45, being the sum of the redundancy payment, unfair dismissal compensation, notice pay compensation and unpaid holiday pay.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal was procedurally unfair and awarded £177 compensation in respect of that unfair dismissal. The judgment does not split this sum into basic and compensatory elements. | Upheld | — | £177 |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim was for non-payment of notice pay and succeeded. | Upheld | — | £1,742 |
| Holiday pay | The claim for non-payment of holiday succeeded and the tribunal awarded £1,393.65 for unpaid holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £1,394 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed for reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £1,330. | Upheld | — | £1,330 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,642
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £177
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.