Ms. C E Williams v ABCDE1 Ltd (in Administration) and The Secretary of State for Business and Trade: 2303022/2024
JUDGMENT
[1]It not being clear from the file if the application has already been dealt with, the Claimant’s application to amend the first respondent’s name from “Woodfield Systems Limited” to “ABCDE1 Limited (in Administration)” is allowed.[2]It not being clear from the file if the Second Respondent has been formally added to the proceedings, but there being an ET3 from them, the Second Respondent is hereby added to the proceedings and the ET3 dated 11 July 2024 be relied upon. The Second Respondent indicating therein that they do not intend to attend today, but rely on the submissions contained in their ET3.[3]The Claimant was unfairly dismissed. The Tribunal found that the letter dismissing the Claimant for Gross Misconduct was without merit and was nothing more than a shameless attempt to avoid paying redundancy pay to an employee with a long record of service with the company.[4]The First Respondent to pay the Claimant a basic award of £13,503.00.[5]The First Respondent to pay the Claimant for one day of holiday which was accrued but not taken in the sum of £116.56.[6]The First Respondent to pay the Claimant her notice pay in the sum of £8,741.16.[7]The Tribunal having found that the First Respondent acted in a manner which breached the ACAS code, the First Respondent is to pay an additional 25% on top of the above damages, in the sum of £5,590.18. Case No: 2303022/2024[8]The total sum due to be paid by the First Respondent is £27,950.90.[9]The Claimant’s claims against the Second Respondent are premature as no application has yet been made to the Secretary of State for payment. As such the Tribunal does not currently have jurisdiction to hear the claim and the claims against the Second Respondent are dismissed.