Claimant v The Edam Group Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the breach of contract complaint in relation to notice pay to be well-founded under rule 21 procedure where the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The claimant was entitled to notice pay which was not provided by the respondent.
The unfair dismissal complaint was well-founded. The respondent failed to defend the claim having not submitted a valid response on time. The tribunal determined under rule 21 that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. The respondent also unreasonably failed to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015.
Facts
K Ali was employed by The Edam Group Limited until his employment was terminated. He brought claims for unfair dismissal and breach of contract relating to notice pay. The respondent, which was in administration, failed to present a valid response on time to the claim filed on 27th November 2024. The claimant secured new employment on 2nd December 2024 at a lower salary and received Job Seekers Allowance during the intervening period.
Decision
The tribunal determined the claims under rule 21 procedure and found both the unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims to be well-founded. The respondent was ordered to pay £21,373.11 in total, comprising notice pay, basic and compensatory awards, loss of earnings, loss of statutory rights, and a 25% ACAS uplift due to the respondent's failure to follow the ACAS Code on disciplinary procedures.
Practical note
Default judgments under rule 21 can result in substantial awards including maximum ACAS uplifts where respondents in administration fail to engage with tribunal proceedings and comply with basic procedural fairness requirements.
Award breakdown
Adjustments
Respondent unreasonably failed to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015. 25% uplift applied to compensatory award calculated at £4,331.35
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2407306/2024
- Decision date
- 20 August 2025
- Hearing type
- rule 21
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- default
Respondent
- Sector
- other
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No