Ms S Jan v Switch2 Energy Limited — 2026

Case reference: 6011455/2024
Decision date: 3 March 2026
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Robertson
Panel members: Mrs S Scott, Mr D Eales

Indexed: 25 April 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms S Jan

Respondent

Switch2 Energy Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This is a unanimous first remedy judgment of the Tribunal. The respondent (Switch2 Energy Limited) was ordered to pay damages for breach of contract of £2,801.68 in respect of the claimant's entitlement to seven weeks' notice of termination of employment, comprising £2,667.63 of gross pay (seven weeks at £381.09 per week) and £134.05 in respect of the value of life insurance and private medical cover for the same period.

The Tribunal also ordered a basic award of compensation for unfair dismissal under section 119 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 in the sum of £2,667.63. All other matters of remedy, including the compensatory award for unfair dismissal under section 123 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, were adjourned to a further remedy hearing in accordance with the Tribunal's separate case management orders. Summary reasons were given orally and not reproduced in writing.

Claims and outcomes

2 claims adjudicated

Claim type	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Breach of contract	Upheld	—	£2,802
Unfair dismissal	Upheld	—	£2,668

Source tags (gov.uk)

Breach of Contract
Disability Discrimination
Religion or Belief Discrimination and Unfair Dismissal

Legal tests applied

2 references

section 119 Employment Rights Act 1996
section 123 Employment Rights Act 1996

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £5,469
Basic award: £2,668

Source document

Primary record

The full judgment is available on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Download judgment (PDF)

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.