Case 6021769/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs. Jemma Garton v Tal.Ai Limited Hearing: Public Hearing — 2025
- Case reference
- 6021769/2024
- Decision date
- 24 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tinnion Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs. Jemma Garton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal held that Mrs Jemma Garton's claim for a statutory redundancy payment under s.163(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well founded. It calculated her entitlement as £4,999.93, based on 13 years of continuous employment and gross weekly pay of £384.61.
The Tribunal also held that Mrs Garton's breach of contract claim for notice pay was well founded. It calculated notice pay of £3,777.96, based on a 12-week notice entitlement and net weekly pay of £314.83. Mrs Garton gave credit for £3,000 already paid in two instalments of £1,500, on or about 31 July and 31 August 2024. After that credit, the Tribunal ordered Tal.Ai Limited to pay £5,777.89 without deduction or withholding.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The statutory redundancy payment entitlement was calculated at £4,999.93. A collective credit of £3,000 was applied against the redundancy and notice pay entitlements, but the judgment did not allocate that credit between the two claims. | Upheld | — | £5,000 |
| Breach of contract | The notice pay entitlement was calculated at £3,777.96. A collective credit of £3,000 was applied against the redundancy and notice pay entitlements, but the judgment did not allocate that credit between the two claims. | Upheld | — | £3,778 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,778
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.163(1) 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.