Case 6007292/2024 · Employment Tribunal
S Duggan v Sole Biz Ltd (in creditors’ voluntary liquidation) — 2025
- Case reference
- 6007292/2024
- Decision date
- 6 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
S Duggan
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn a judgment sent on 6 March 2025, Judge M Butler Date held that S Duggan's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well-founded and ordered Sole Biz Limited (in creditors' voluntary liquidation) to pay £1,521.03. The tribunal also recorded that the claimant's redundancy payment, breach of contract and holiday pay claims had been satisfied by payments from the Insolvency Service.
The unfair dismissal complaint was found well-founded, but no basic award was made because it had been extinguished by the redundancy payment. The tribunal said it could not see a basis for a compensatory award because the claimant was receiving notice pay and, most likely, her employment would have ended in any event; if she wished to pursue such an award, she was to provide the basis and calculations within 14 days.
The tribunal further found a failure to comply with s.188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and made a protective award covering the 90-day period beginning on 5 July 2024. At that stage the award was not quantified; the claimant was directed to contact the liquidators to agree the sum payable, and if there were any dispute or non-payment, to bring a further claim under s.192 of the same Act. The recoupment regulations were said to apply to the protective award.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,521 |
| Redundancy | The judgment states this claim had been satisfied by payments from the Insolvency Service. | Other | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states this claim had been satisfied by payments from the Insolvency Service. | Other | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states this claim had been satisfied by payments from the Insolvency Service. | Other | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal unfair, but made no basic award because it had been extinguished by the redundancy payment and no compensatory award at this stage because the claimant was receiving notice pay and her employment would most likely have ended in any event. | Upheld | — | — |
| Trade union | The tribunal found a failure to comply with s.188 TULR(C)A 1992 and made a protective award for the 90-day period beginning on 5 July 2024, but did not quantify the award at this stage. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,521
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.188 TULR(C)A 1992
- s.192 TULR(C)A 1992
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.