Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
1.���� This is an application by the claimant for leave to appeal from the decision of a tribunal with reference ST/03865/19/05/O.
2.���� For the reasons I give below, I grant leave to appeal. �However, I dismiss the appeal.
3.���� The issue in this case is whether tribunal was correct to hold that a payment of pay in lieu of notice, made after the termination of the appellant�s employment, fell to be treated as employed earnings.
5.���� The appellant requested a statement of reasons for the tribunal�s decision and this was issued on 27 April 2021. �On 25 May 2021 the appellant applied to the tribunal for leave to appeal to the Social Security Commissioner. �The LQM refused leave to appeal by a decision issued on 28 June 2021. �On 1 July 2021 the appellant applied to a Social Security Commissioner for leave to appeal.
6.���� The appellant, represented by Mr MacManus of Quigley MacManus (Solicitors), submits that the tribunal has erred in law on the basis that the payments received by the appellant should not have been taken into account as they were termination of employment payments, and that they were attributable to a different period than the assessment period. �He further submitted that the tribunal had misconstrued the relevant law as demonstrated by comments distinguishing between dismissal and redundancy.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.