Case 6018913/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Zoe Mitchell v Apexco Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6018913/2024
- Decision date
- 17 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Zoe Mitchell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Midgley, sitting alone at Bristol by CVP on 17 October 2025, recorded a judgment by consent following the respondent's concession of the claims. The tribunal found that the claims for redundancy pay, notice pay, and unauthorised deduction of wages were well founded and succeeded.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £17,830.80 gross in redundancy pay, £2,971.80 net in notice pay, and £594.36 gross in unpaid wages. Reasons were given orally at the hearing and written reasons will not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Awarded £17,830.80 gross. Conceded by the respondent; judgment by consent. | Upheld | — | £17,831 |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay awarded £2,971.80 net. Conceded by the respondent; judgment by consent. | Upheld | — | £2,972 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unpaid wages awarded £594.36 gross. Conceded by the respondent; judgment by consent. | Upheld | — | £594 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £21,397
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.