Case 6008556/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Bell v The Mates Group Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6008556/2024
- Decision date
- 3 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge KM Ross
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Bell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued by Employment Judge KM Ross without a contested hearing. The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered the respondent to pay damages in the gross sum of £16,749.99.
The tribunal further found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment of £1,400, calculated as one week's pay for each full year worked while aged over 22 and under 41, with the weekly pay figure capped at the statutory £700 cap. The total amount payable by the respondent to the claimant under the judgment is £18,149.99, and the hearing previously listed for 4 February 2025 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice, awarded in the gross sum of £16,749.99. | Upheld | — | £16,749 |
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment calculated as 1 week's pay for each full year worked aged over 22 and under 41 (1 x 2 x £1,288.46, capped at £700 per week) = £1,400. | Upheld | — | £1,400 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £18,149
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 - Rule 21
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.