Case 3333021/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Duran v Respondent — 2019
- Case reference
- 3333021/2018
- Decision date
- 28 January 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Vowles
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr B Duran
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal issued a Rule 21 judgment after the Respondent, United Car Parts Limited, failed to present a response to the claim. Judgment was therefore entered in favour of the Claimant, Mr B Duran, without a contested hearing.
The judgment records three monetary awards. The Claimant was found to be owed a redundancy payment of £2,260.91, wages of £442.39, and notice pay of £1,507.27. Those sums were awarded as the tribunal's substantive relief on the face of the judgment.
The total award was £4,210.57, and the Respondent was ordered to pay that sum to the Claimant. The hearing listed for 28 May 2019 was cancelled. The judgment was sent to the parties on 28 January 2019.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Rule 21 judgment entered because the Respondent failed to present a response. | Upheld | — | £2,261 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records that the Claimant was owed wages. | Upheld | — | £442 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records that the Claimant was owed notice pay. | Upheld | — | £1,507 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,211
- 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.