Case 6012170/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Salary O Osadcha v Aisha Haq, Handy Helpers — 2024
- Case reference
- 6012170/2024
- Decision date
- 11 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Salary O Osadcha
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered only the claimant’s claim for a redundancy payment. It noted section 155 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, which provides that an employee is not entitled to a redundancy payment unless they have been employed for two years or more.
The tribunal found that Salary O Osadcha had been employed by Aisha Haq, Handy Helpers for less than two years. On that basis, it concluded that the claimant did not have the right to a redundancy payment.
The claimant had been given an opportunity by tribunal letter dated 17 October 2024 to explain why the claim should not be struck out, but no response was received. The redundancy payment claim was therefore struck out. The tribunal stated that the claimant’s other complaints were not affected by this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The claimant sought a redundancy payment, but the tribunal found she had been employed for less than two years and did not respond to the tribunal letter dated 17 October 2024 inviting explanation. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.155 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.