Case 3323649/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr I Silkander v First Choice Produce Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3323649/2021
- Decision date
- 25 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Price Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr I Silkander
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard Mr I Silkander's claims against First Choice Produce Ltd at Watford on 25 November 2022. The written judgment records that the hearing was before Employment Judge Price, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by an employment consultant.
The tribunal found that the claimant's complaint for breach of the Working Time Regulations, described in the judgment as a holiday pay claim, was well founded and awarded £3,519. It also found that the claimant's redundancy pay claim was well founded and awarded £10,808.
The claimant's breach of contract claim, identified in the judgment as a notice pay claim, was also found well founded, with an award of £351.02. The record does not set out additional reasoning beyond those outcome findings.
The total of the three awards is £14,678.02. The written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal's standard post-hearing procedure.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Working time regulations | Complaint for breach of the Working Time Regulations (holiday pay). | Upheld | — | £3,519 |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £10,808 |
| Breach of contract | Claim was for notice pay. | Upheld | — | £351 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,678
- 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.