Case 6006180/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Ducroisy (claimant’s partner and lay representative) For both v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 6006180/2024
- Decision date
- 30 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lewis Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr M Ducroisy (claimant’s partner and lay representative) For both
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in London Central on 23 to 26 June 2025, Employment Judge Lewis found that Ms L Litzelmann was unfairly dismissed by Rightsline Software UK Ltd. The tribunal also found that Rightsline failed to provide true written reasons for dismissal contrary to s92 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and that Real Software Systems LLC failed in its duty to inform and consult under the TUPE regulations. The tribunal recorded that the TUPE liability was joint and several as between the 1st and 2nd respondents. The breach of contract claim was not upheld.
On remedy, the tribunal awarded £8,076.90 for the TUPE claim. For the dismissal-related claims, it recorded a £1,400 award for failure to provide written reasons and a £62,900 compensatory award for unfair dismissal, made up of £62,400 for past and future loss of earnings and £500 for loss of statutory rights. It then grossed up the taxable dismissal awards, stated that the recoupment regulations did not apply, and reached a figure of £69,732.50 for those dismissal-related awards.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that Ms L Litzelmann was unfairly dismissed by the 1st respondent. The judgment recorded an unfair dismissal compensatory award of £62,900, made up of £62,400 for past and future loss of earnings and £500 for loss of statutory rights. | Upheld | — | £62,900 |
| Other | The tribunal found that the 1st respondent failed to provide true written reasons for dismissal contrary to s92 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment recorded £1,400 for this item in the dismissal-related award calculation. | Upheld | — | £1,400 |
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The tribunal found that the 2nd respondent failed in its duty to inform and consult under the TUPE regulations. The tribunal said the 1st and 2nd respondents were jointly and severally liable for this award. | Upheld | — | £8,077 |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim was not upheld. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £77,809
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £62,900
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
2 references- s92 ERA 1996
- TUPE regulations
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.