Case 6019617/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Jacob v Watch Home Care Services Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6019617/2025
- Decision date
- 2 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dunlop Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs J Jacob
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningSitting at Manchester Employment Tribunal by CVP on 2 December 2025, Employment Judge Dunlop heard the claim against Watch Home Care Services Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) and the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. The claimant appeared in person; the Secretary of State was represented by Miss H Riezzo.
The tribunal found that the claimant was employed under a contract of service with the first respondent and was therefore entitled to a statutory redundancy payment to be met by the Secretary of State's redundancy payments service. The claimant's weekly pay of £503.77 was the higher of two figures given by the liquidator on form RP14a, which the tribunal accepted reflected the first respondent's four-week pay period. Applying 20 years worked at an age factor of 1.5 to weekly pay of £503.77, the tribunal calculated a redundancy payment of £15,113.10.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Statutory redundancy payment to be met by the second respondent's redundancy payments service following voluntary liquidation of first respondent. Calculated as 20 (years worked) x 1.5 (age factor) x £503.77 weekly pay. | Upheld | — | £15,113 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £15,113
- 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.