Case 3324968/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Parada v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 3324968/2019
- Decision date
- 23 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JUDGMENT
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr L Parada
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was entered on the basis that the time for presenting a response had expired and no valid response had been presented in time. On the information before Employment Judge M Warren, the Claimant's claims succeeded in full.
The tribunal awarded the Claimant a total of £16,547. That sum was broken down as £4,950 redundancy pay, £5,297 wages for 16 July to 23 October 2019, £4,500 notice pay for 10 weeks, and £1,800 for 20 days' holiday pay. The wages figure included one week's notice given and £173 in deducted pension payments.
The judgment records that all sums were calculated gross, were to be paid without deduction, and were taxable in the hands of the Claimant. No further findings of fact or legal reasoning are set out in the extracted text beyond the successful outcome and the heads of award.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Awarded as redundancy pay in paragraph 1.1 of the judgment. | Upheld | — | £4,950 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded for wages for 16 July to 23 October 2019, including one week's notice given and £173 in deducted pension payments. | Upheld | — | £5,297 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded as notice pay for 10 weeks, with one week's notice having been given. | Upheld | — | £4,500 |
| Holiday pay | Awarded as 20 days holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £1,800 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £16,547
- 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.