Case 3332168/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Kirby v Electrical Minimisation Facilities Ltd (In voluntary liquidation) — 2019
- Case reference
- 3332168/2018
- Decision date
- 18 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hawksworth Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Kirby
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Reading on 18 September 2019, Employment Judge Hawksworth heard the case with Mr T Kirby appearing in person and no attendance or representation for Electrical Minimisation Facilities Ltd, which was in voluntary liquidation. The judgment was given orally at the hearing.
The tribunal held that the claimant's statutory redundancy payment claim succeeded and awarded £8,068.50. It also found the complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages well-founded and awarded £1,000 for arrears of pay.
The tribunal further awarded £10,890 in respect of 11 weeks' notice pay. The total monetary award recorded by the judgment was £19,958.50.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal awarded a statutory redundancy payment of £8,068.50. | Upheld | — | £8,069 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages well-founded and awarded £1,000 for arrears of pay arising from the payment made on 21 May 2018. | Upheld | — | £1,000 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal awarded £10,890 in respect of 11 weeks' notice pay; the extracted text does not separately label this cause of action, so this classification is based on the notice-pay award. | Upheld | — | £10,890 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £19,959
- 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.