Case 8000746/2026 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Nelson v William Keith Lawrence trading as Lawrence Creative — 2026
- Case reference
- 8000746/2026
- Decision date
- 15 May 2026
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Mannion
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Nelson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe response presented on 24 April 2026 did not resist the claim. Employment Judge E Mannion issued judgment on the available material under Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.
The tribunal found that Mr D Nelson was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It ordered William Keith Lawrence trading as Lawrence Creative to pay damages of £7,927.80, calculated as 12 weeks at £660.65 net pay per week.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £19,772.50, calculated as 27.5 weeks at the £719.00 statutory cap per week. The combined sums ordered were £27,700.30, with no interest or other remedy component recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment describes this as dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice, with damages calculated as 12 weeks at £660.65 net pay per week. | Upheld | — | £7,928 |
| Redundancy | The judgment states the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment calculated as 27.5 weeks at the £719 statutory cap per week. | Upheld | — | £19,773 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £27,700
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.