Ms M Anderson v Matalan Ltd: 3213407/2020 and 3203326/2021
JUDGMENT
Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 – Rule 21 Upon the Respondent failing to file an ET3 within the time limit imposed by rule 16 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 AND Upon considering the information provided by the Claimant in her ET1[1]The Claimant’s claim for unfair dismissal brought under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is well founded.[2]The Claimant’s claim for a redundancy payment (less any sum actually paid) brought under Section 163 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is well founded.[3]The Claimant’s claim in respect of holiday pay relating to accrued but untaken holiday and brought either under regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 or alternatively under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is well founded.[4]The Tribunal will determine the sums due from the Respondent to the Claimant at a remedy hearing the date and time of which shall be notified to the parties. Employment Judge Crosfill Date: 24 May 2021 Case Number: 3213407/2020 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Miss M Anderson Respondent: Matalan Limited Heard at: East London Hearing Centre On: 26 July 2021 Before: Regional Employment Judge Taylor Representation Claimant: In person Respondent: Response not enteredREASONS
[1]The claim was issued in the London East Employment Tribunals on 10 November 2021. The respondent has failed to present a valid response on time. An Employment Judge has decided that a determination can properly be made of the claim in accordance with rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure and therefore a liability judgment was sent to the parties on 24 May 2021. This hearing was listed to determine remedy.[2]The claimant attended the hearing in person but unfortunately did not have the required documentation with her. The claimant explained that she had been informed by a tribunal clerk that the hearing was not today, but on a date in October. Having checked the tribunal case file it is clear that an order was sent to the claimant on 29 June 2021 informing her of today’s hearing. It is unclear how the claimant could have been informed about any other date of hearing. The claimant gave evidence that she had started work in her new job Case Number: 3213407/2020 2 on 20 June 2020. Calculation of compensation could not be completed and therefore the hearing was vacated and substituted by a case management hearing.[3]The claimant was ordered to provide the following documents as soon as possible:3.1 The letter from the claimant’s employer responding to queries she made about sick pay and holiday pay.3.2 The claimant’s October 2020 and November 2020 pay statements.3.3 The starting date of the claimant’s employment with her new employer and the claimant’s terms and conditions of employment.[4]The claimant agreed to send these documents to the tribunal by 3 August 2021. However, the claimant did not send the letter dealing with her queried about sick pay and holiday pay. The claimant provided pay statements 8 September 2020, 6 October 2020, 3 November 2020 and a contract of employment with her new employer. The claimant’s net weekly pay is calculated at £124.92 per week (£543.34 (monthly net pay) x 12 months ÷52). The claimant has not produced evidence that her sick pay or holiday pay has been miscalculated therefore these claims in respect of these are dismissed.[5]The claimant’s claim that she was unfairly dismissed succeeds and the remedy for unfair dismissal to which the claimant is entitled is £4,970.21 and the calculation is set out in the attached schedule. Regional Employment Judge Taylor Date: 5 August 2021 Case Number: 3213407/2020 3 IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS CASE NO: 3213407/20 BETWEEN Ms Anderson AND Matalan CALCULATION OF LOSS[1]Details Date of birth of claimant 09/12/1986 Date started employment 03/11/2014 Effective Date of Termination 11/11/2020 Period of continuous service (years) 6 Age at Effective Date of Termination 33 Date new equivalent job started or expected to start 20/06/2021 Remedy hearing date 26/07/2021 Date by which employer should no longer be liable 20/06/2021 Statutory notice period (weeks) 6 Net weekly pay at EDT 124.92 Gross weekly pay at EDT 128.79 Gross annual pay at EDT 6,864.00[2]Basic award Basic award Number of qualifying weeks (6) x Gross weekly pay (128.79) 772.74 Total basic award 772.74[3]Compensatory award (immediate loss) Loss of net earnings Number of weeks (31.6) x Net weekly pay (124.92) 3,947.47 Plus loss of statutory rights 250.00 Total compensation (immediate loss) 4,197.47[4]Adjustments to total compensatory award Compensatory award before adjustments 4,197.47 Total adjustments to the compensatory award 0.00 Compensatory award after adjustments 4,197.47 Case Number: 3213407/2020 4[5]Summary totals Basic award 772.74 Compensation award including statutory rights 4,197.47 Total 4,970.21 4,970.21 Case Numbers: 3203326/2021 & 3213407/2020 11.11 Judgment on reconsideration of rule 21 Judgment – hearing - rule 70 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Ms M Anderson Respondent: Matalan Retail Limited Heard at: East London Employment Tribunal On: 16 September 2021 Before: Employment Judge Crosfill Representation Claimant: In person assisted by her sister Respondent: Catherine Meenan of Counsel UPON APPLICATION made by e-mail dated 11 August 2021 to reconsider or set aside the judgment under rule 71 and/or rule 20 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 dated 24 May 2021[1]The judgments of 24 May 2021 and the remedy judgment of 26 July 2021 in Case No: 3213407/2020 are set aside.[2]The Respondent is granted an extension of time to 30 September 2021 to file any response to Case No: 3213407/2020.[3]Upon the Claimant accepting that Claim No 3203326/2021 is a duplicate claim issued in error that claim is struck out.