Case 6008144/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Edwards v Abacus Architechts Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6008144/2024
- Decision date
- 20 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Akhtar Attendances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Edwards
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claimant's claim for statutory redundancy pay was well founded. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant 11886.20 pounds for that claim.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant's claim for unpaid contractual notice pay was well founded and ordered payment of 1807.25 pounds. The claimant's claims for unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction from wages were dismissed upon withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The judgment states that the claim for statutory redundancy pay is well founded and awards this sum. | Upheld | — | £11,886 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claim for unpaid contractual notice pay is well founded and awards this sum. | Upheld | — | £1,807 |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the unlawful deduction from wages claim was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,693
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.