Case 3315389/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Barrett v Wembley Tyres Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 3315389/2022
- Decision date
- 12 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Quill Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Barrett
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not file a response, and the tribunal dealt with the case on the papers after noting that the respondent had not objected. ACAS conciliation took place from 10 to 25 November 2022, and the claim was presented on 23 December 2022. The tribunal found that the claimant had worked for the respondent for more than two years, although the exact start date was not specified consistently in the papers.
On around 16 August 2022 the claimant was told that the company was ceasing trading and that he would be entitled to a redundancy payment. He was dismissed with immediate effect on 16 August 2022 and was not given notice. The tribunal found that, because of his length of service, he was entitled to at least 12 weeks' notice and had received none. It inferred that he was unemployed for around two weeks before starting a new job at the beginning of September 2022, and that his later earnings exceeded those he had received from the respondent.
The tribunal held that the unfair dismissal claim was well-founded, but it made no compensation award on that claim because the claimant's loss of earnings was covered by the breach of contract award. It also made no basic award because the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment. The tribunal therefore awarded £418.16 for notice pay and £265.96 for unpaid holiday entitlement, and recorded that the redundancy payment itself was not quantified in the judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Found well-founded. The tribunal made no compensation award because the claimant's loss of earnings was covered by the breach of contract award, and no basic award was made because he was entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Notice damages were awarded for the immediate dismissal without notice. The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to at least 12 weeks' notice, inferred around two weeks' unemployment, and awarded £418.16 without deduction. | Upheld | — | £418 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment, but did not quantify the amount. It noted he might need to make a claim to the Redundancy Payments Service and that the start date of employment had not been specified. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant's holiday entitlement had not been paid and ordered £265.96, subject to any lawfully required PAYE deductions but without any other deduction or set-off. | Upheld | — | £266 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £684
- 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.