VadeLab
AllowedEmployment Tribunal·england-and-wales·

Worker Wins Unfair Dismissal Case at Employment Tribunal

Case No. 6039452/2025 · Judge Tegerdine

📌 In brief

A worker won a case at an Employment Tribunal after being unfairly dismissed without proper notice or redundancy payment. The judge ordered the employer to pay compensation for unfair dismissal, breach of contract, and holiday pay.

⚖️ Legal holding

An employer must provide notice pay, statutory redundancy payment, and holiday pay upon termination of employment.

Topics

unfair dismissalredundancybreach of contract

Provisions

s.98 Employment Rights Act 1996reg 3 Working Time Regulations 1998

📖 What the law says

Employment Rights Act 1996 s.98

This section outlines the criteria for determining whether a dismissal is fair or unfair. It requires the employer to demonstrate the reason for the dismissal and prove that the reason falls within certain categories, including the employee's capability or qualifications, conduct, redundancy, or a contravention of a duty or restriction imposed by law.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a solicitor.

📖 Technical summary

The claimant was awarded compensation for unfair dismissal, breach of contract, and unlawful deduction from wages.

📜 Headnote Official document

The claimant was unfairly dismissed by the respondent. The Tribunal awarded compensation for unfair dismissal, breach of contract (notice pay), and unlawful deduction from wages (holiday pay). The decision highlights the employer's obligations under employment law.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Allowed

Case Number: 6039452/2025 v3 10.2.25 1

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Claimant: [redacted] Respondent: [redacted] Heard at:

Sheffield (by video) On: 28 April 2026 Before: Employment Judge Tegerdine

REPRESENTATION:

Claimant: [redacted] Respondent: [redacted] On 23 December 2025 the Tribunal issued a written judgment under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure. The Tribunal found that: 1. The claimant was unfairly dismissed.

2. The claimant’s claim for a statutory redundancy payment succeeds.

3. The respondent was in breach of contract by failing to pay the claimant his full notice pay.

4. The respondent made an unauthorised deduction of wages by failing to pay the claimant in respect of the claimant’s accrued but untaken holiday. The Tribunal now makes the following awards in respect of the claimant’s claims. The judgment of the Tribunal is that the respondent is ordered to pay to the claimant: [redacted] v3 10.2.25 2

2. A statutory redundancy payment of £1,831.52.

3. A sum of £877.68 in lieu of 11.5 days’ accrued but untaken holiday.

4. Compensation of £14,999.38 for unfair dismissal.

The total gross sum due to the claimant is therefore £18,624.33.

The respondent is ordered to pay the sums due to the claimant on or before 12 May 2026.

A schedule with sets out how the sums which are due to the claimant have been calculated is attached.

Case Number: 6039452/2025 v3 10.2.25 3

SCHEDULE – CALCULATION OF AWARDS

(1) Breach of contract (notice pay)

The claimant was dismissed on 1 August 2025.

The claimant’s hourly rate of pay as at the termination date was £12.21

The claimant’s normal working hours as at the termination date were 25 hours per week.

The claimant’s normal weekly pay as at the termination date was £305.25 per week.

The claimant had been continuously employed for over 4 years as at the termination date, so had a statutory entitlement to a minimum of 4 weeks’ notice. However, he only received 1 week’s notice pay. He is therefore entitled to the balance of 3 weeks’ notice pay.

3 weeks x £305.25 = £915.75

Total notice pay owed (3 weeks) = £915.75

(2) Statutory redundancy pay

The claimant worked 25 hours per week and was paid £12.21 per hour. The claimant’s gross weekly pay was therefore £305.25.

The claimant’s employment with the respondent commenced on 3 May 2021 and ended on 1 August 2025. He was therefore employed for 4 complete years.

The claimant was 55 years old as at the termination date, so was entitled to 1.5 weeks’ gross pay for each full year of employment.

4 years x 1.5 x £305.25 = £1,831.52

Total statutory redundancy pay owed = £1,831.52

(3) Unlawful deduction from wages (holiday pay)

The claimant was entitled to a payment in lieu of 11.5 days’ accrued but untaken statutory holiday entitlement in respect of the holiday year which commenced on 1 January 2025.

The claimant’s hourly rate of pay as at the termination date was £12.21 per hour. The claimant worked 6.25 hours per day.

6.25 hours x £12.21 per hour = £76.32 per day

£76.32 x 11.5 days = £877.68

Case Number: 6039452/2025 v3 10.2.25 4

Total holiday pay owed = £877.68

(2) Unfair dismissal

Basic award

The claimant is not entitled to a basic award, as he was dismissed by reason of redundancy and has been awarded a statutory redundancy payment.

The basic award is therefore zero.

Compensatory award

The claimant had a statutory entitlement to 4 weeks’ notice. His employment terminated on 1 August 2025 and if he had been given 4 weeks’ notice, his notice would have expired on 29 August 2025.

The claimant has been unemployed since his employment terminated, however he expects to find alternative work in 13 weeks.

(1) Immediate financial loss

34.5 weeks’ pay (30 August 2025 – 28 April 2026) x £305.25 = £10,531.13

Loss of statutory rights - £500 Total compensation for immediate financial loss = £11,031.13

(2) Future financial loss

13 weeks’ pay x £305.25 = ££3,968.25

Total compensation for future financial loss = £3,968.25

Total compensatory award = £14,999.38

Employment Judge Tegerdine

1 May 2026

Case Number: 6039452/2025 v3 10.2.25 5

Note Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing. Written reasons will not be provided unless a party asked for them at the hearing or a party makes a written request within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision.

Public access to employment tribunal decisions Judgments (apart from judgments under rule 51) and reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the claimant(s) and respondent(s) in a case.

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • Employer must provide notice pay upon termination of employment.
  • Employer must make statutory redundancy payment to eligible employees.
  • Employer must ensure all outstanding wages, including holiday pay, are settled before dismissal.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The claimant was awarded compensation for unfair dismissal, breach of contract (notice pay), and unlawful deduction from wages (holiday pay).

Who was involved?

A worker who was unfairly dismissed by their employer.

How did the court decide, and why?

The Tribunal found that the employer failed to provide proper notice and redundancy payment, violating employment laws. The claimant's arguments were supported by clear evidence of unfair dismissal.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Employment Rights Act 1996 (s.98) and Working Time Regulations 1998 (reg 3).

What was the argument that mattered most?

The claimant's evidence of unfair dismissal, lack of notice pay, and unpaid holiday entitlement.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

For the claimant.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

If dismissed unfairly without proper notice or redundancy payment, an employee may seek compensation through an Employment Tribunal.

What evidence or documents mattered?

Documentation of employment terms and conditions, pay stubs, and correspondence regarding dismissal.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, either party can appeal the decision to a higher court within a specified timeframe.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.

Official source: Employment Tribunal — england-and-wales headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the Employment Tribunal and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.