Case 6019705/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Tate v Qarbon Capital Limited HELD AT: Newcastle — 2025
- Case reference
- 6019705/2024
- Decision date
- 27 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moss REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Tate
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss J Tate brought claims against Qarbon Capital Limited for statutory redundancy pay, unpaid statutory notice pay, unlawful deductions from wages, accrued but untaken holiday pay, and breach of contract in respect of unpaid expenses. Employment Judge Moss heard the case in Newcastle on 27 January 2025. The respondent did not appear. The judgment records that the claim for statutory redundancy pay was well founded and that the tribunal ordered £2,880, calculated by reference to gross weekly earnings of £480 and the statutory formula set out in the reasons.
The tribunal also found the claims for unpaid statutory notice pay, unlawful deductions from wages and accrued but untaken holiday pay to be well founded. It awarded a combined net sum of £1,731.73 for those three heads of claim together, and did not allocate that figure between the individual claims. The judgment says the sums were not in dispute and were supported by documentary evidence, but that separating the amounts between the heads of claim was complicated because the respondent had already paid £635.31 and there was some uncertainty about the claimant's net rate of pay.
The breach of contract claim for unpaid expenses was also found well founded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £280 in respect of that claim. The written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal ordered payment of statutory redundancy pay of £2,880, calculated on the basis of gross weekly earnings of £480 multiplied by 6. | Upheld | — | £2,880 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claim for unpaid statutory notice pay, unlawful deductions from wages and accrued but untaken holiday pay well founded, but stated that the combined total for those three heads was £1,731.73 and did not split the amount between them. It noted that £635.31 had already been paid and that there was some uncertainty about the claimant's net rate of pay. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claim for accrued but untaken holiday pay well founded, but stated that the combined total for notice pay, unlawful deductions from wages and holiday pay was £1,731.73 and did not split the amount between them. It noted that £635.31 had already been paid and that there was some uncertainty about the claimant's net rate of pay. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the breach of contract claim in respect of unpaid expenses well founded and ordered payment of £280. | Upheld | — | £280 |
| Other | The tribunal found the claim for unpaid statutory notice pay well founded, but the judgment does not list it as a separate quantified award. It is included within the combined sum of £1,731.73 for notice pay, unlawful deductions from wages and holiday pay. | Upheld |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,892
- 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.