Case 6011144/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Deborah Whitwell v Fun Planet Ltd (trading as Kidzplay) — 2025
- Case reference
- 6011144/2025
- Decision date
- 11 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tegerdine Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Deborah Whitwell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunal on 1 April 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024. The claimant had been employed as an Events Manager and was dismissed by reason of redundancy with an effective date of termination of 7 December 2024.
The tribunal found the claimant was contractually entitled to one month's notice but was dismissed without notice, and ordered the respondent to pay £4,583.33 in respect of breach of contract (notice pay). The tribunal further found the respondent had not reimbursed £3,908.76 of reasonable expenses owed under the contract of employment, also a breach of contract. The claimant was held entitled to a statutory redundancy payment of £3,150.00, calculated as £700 (the weekly cap on a week's pay) multiplied by 1.5, multiplied by 3 years of service.
The total gross sum awarded was £11,642.09, payable on or before 25 August 2025.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay: claimant entitled to one month's notice but dismissed without notice. | Upheld | — | £4,583 |
| Breach of contract | Unreimbursed reasonable expenses incurred in connection with employment, notified to the respondent. | Upheld | — | £3,909 |
| Redundancy | Calculated as £700 (statutory weekly cap) x 1.5 x 3 years. | Upheld | — | £3,150 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,642
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2024
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.