Mrs J Goodchild and Mrs J Lowcock v Ceased Trading 05673115 Ltd: 1306353/2024 and 1602532/2024
JUDGMENT
[1]The claimants’ claims of unfair dismissal are well founded. The claimants were unfairly dismissed by the respondent.[2]The respondent shall pay the first claimant, Mrs Goodchild, a compensatory award of £7,610.46.[3]The respondent shall pay the second claimant, Mrs Lowcock, a compensatory award of £9,455.30.[4]The Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 do not apply in this case as neither claimant claimed any state benefits following their dismissals.[5]Under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 it is determined that the first claimant, Mrs Goodchild, is entitled to a redundancy payment of £1,415.25.[6]Under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 it is determined that the second claimant, Mrs Lowcock, is entitled to a redundancy payment of £945.00.[7]The complaints in respect of holiday pay are well-founded. The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimants’ wages by failing to pay the claimants for holidays accrued but not taken on the date the claimants’ employment ended.[8]The respondent shall pay the first claimant, Mrs Goodchild, £939.80. The first claimant is responsible for paying any tax or National Insurance.[9]The respondent shall pay the second claimant, Mrs Lowcock, £985.50. The second claimant is responsible for paying any tax or National Insurance.[10]The complaints of unauthorised deductions from wages are well-founded. The respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimants’ wages in the period 1st March 2024 to 12th April 2024.[11]The respondent shall pay the first claimant, Mrs Goodchild, £1,698.30, which is the gross sum deducted. The first claimant is responsible for the payment of any tax or National Insurance.[12]The respondent shall pay the second claimant, Mrs Lowcock, £1,701.00, which is the gross sum deducted. The second claimant is responsible for the payment of any tax or National Insurance.[13]When the proceedings were begun the respondent was in breach of its duty to provide the first claimant, Mrs Goodchild, with a written statement of employment particulars. There are no exceptional circumstances that make an award of an amount equal to two weeks’ gross pay unjust or inequitable. It is not just and equitable to make an award of an amount equal to four weeks’ gross pay. In accordance with section 38 Employment Act 2002 the respondent shall therefore pay the first claimant £629.00.[14]When the proceedings were begun the respondent was in breach of its duty to provide the second claimant, Mrs Lowcock, with a written statement of employment particulars. There are no exceptional circumstances that make an award of an amount equal to two weeks’ gross pay unjust or inequitable. It is not just and equitable to make an award of an amount equal to four weeks’ gross pay. In accordance with section 38 Employment Act 2002 the respondent shall therefore pay the second claimant £630.00.[15]The gross awards payable to each claimant are each reduced by £500.00 to take account of sums paid by the respondent to the claimant subsequent to the claimants’ dismissals.[16]The respondent is therefore ordered to pay to the first claimant, Mrs Goodchild, the total sum of £11,792.81.[17]The respondent is therefore ordered to pay to the first claimant, Mrs Lowcock, the total sum of £13,216.80. Approved on: 29th July 2025 Employment Judge Walker 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.