Case 4122814/2018 · Employment Tribunal
A Kemp (sitting alone) Mrs K Shand v Stand Strong Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 4122814/2018
- Decision date
- 3 May 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mr
- Venue
- Dundee
Parties
2 namedClaimant
A Kemp (sitting alone) Mrs K Shand
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Karen Shand worked as a part-time cleaner from 1 January 2009, initially for Kingdom Taverns Limited and then, following a TUPE transfer found to have occurred on 23 April 2017, for Stand Strong Limited. The respondent did not enter a response or appear at the hearing. The tribunal accepted her evidence as clear and reliable and found that Stand Strong ceased trading on 30 April 2018, after which Kingdom Taverns Limited offered her employment from 1 May 2018 but did not preserve continuity of employment. The tribunal noted there was a possibility of a relevant transfer under the 2006 Regulations, but it could not make a finding on that issue on the evidence before it.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the claimant's contract ended on 30 April 2018 and that this amounted to a dismissal under section 136 ERA 1996. It applied the statutory redundancy presumption in section 163(2) and found the dismissal was by reason of redundancy. Using her weekly wage of £93.75 and nine years' service, all over age 41, it awarded a statutory redundancy payment of £1,265.62 under section 135 ERA 1996.
The tribunal also found that April 2018 wages of £375 had not been paid. Although the unlawful deduction from wages claim was presented outside the usual three-month time limit, the tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that she had contacted Companies House and been told to wait for liquidation or administration, which did not occur. Relying on section 23(4) ERA 1996 and the approach in DHL Supply Chain Ltd v Fazackerley, the tribunal held it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim sooner and that it had been brought within a reasonable period thereafter, so it had jurisdiction to determine the claim and awarded £375.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that April 2018 wages of £375 had not been paid. Although the claim was outwith the usual three-month limit, the tribunal found it had not been reasonably practicable to present earlier because the claimant had been told by Companies House to wait for liquidation or administration, and it accepted jurisdiction under section 23(4) ERA 1996. | Upheld | — | £375 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found that the respondent ceased trading on 30 April 2018, which terminated the claimant's contract and amounted to a dismissal by reason of redundancy. It calculated the statutory redundancy payment by reference to weekly pay of £93.75 and nine years' service, all over age 41. | Upheld | — | £1,266 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,641
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
8 references- section 13 ERA 1996
- section 23(4) ERA 1996
- section 135 ERA 1996
- section 136 ERA 1996
- section 139 ERA 1996
- section 163(2) ERA 1996
- Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006
- DHL Supply Chain Ltd v Fazackerley
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.