Partial win £3,423 awarded Employment Tribunal · 17 November 2023

Short-service employee wins £3,423 for unpaid bonus and notice pay

A former employee with only four months' service successfully claimed unpaid notice pay and a quarterly bonus after a restructuring meeting led to his dismissal. The tribunal awarded £3,423 in total.

2 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026

Case details

Key facts

  • The claimant was employed from 6 June 2022 to 3 October 2022 as a Natural Justice Administrator.
  • The respondent offered 4 weeks' pay in lieu of notice at a restructuring meeting, which the claimant accepted by resigning.
  • The claimant was entitled to a £2,500 quarterly bonus, confirmed by his line manager after a successful appraisal.
  • The respondent failed to pay the notice pay and the bonus.
  • The unfair dismissal claim was struck out due to insufficient service (less than 2 years).
  • The tribunal found the claimant was an employee under a contract of service.

Timeline

  1. Contract signed

    The claimant entered into an 'Agreement to Supply Exclusive Services' with the respondent.

  2. Bonus due

    The claimant's quarterly bonus of £2,500 was due at the end of September 2022 after a successful appraisal.

  3. Restructuring meeting

    The respondent announced a restructuring and offered 4 weeks' pay in lieu of notice to administration staff.

  4. Claimant resigned

    The claimant sent a letter of resignation, giving 28 days' notice, referencing the 4-week notice pay offer.

  5. Respondent confirmed notice pay

    The respondent sent a letter confirming the claimant's last working day as 3 November 2022 and that he would receive full payment for the notice period.

  6. Claimant dismissed

    The respondent sent an email terminating the claimant's contract, citing insubordination at the restructuring meeting.

  7. Disciplinary meeting

    A disciplinary meeting was held and the decision to dismiss was confirmed; no appeal process was provided.

  8. ACAS conciliation started

    Early conciliation commenced.

  9. ACAS conciliation ended

    Early conciliation ended.

  10. Claim presented

    The claimant issued his ET1 claim to the employment tribunal.

The outcome

The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because the claimant had less than two years' service, but allowed the breach of contract and unauthorised deductions claims to proceed.

The tribunal found that the claimant was an employee under a contract of service, despite the agreement being titled 'Agreement to Supply Exclusive Services'. The respondent failed to pay the notice pay (4 weeks' pay in lieu) and the quarterly bonus of £2,500, which had been confirmed by his line manager.

Compensation:

  • £1,923 gross for breach of contract (notice pay)
  • £2,500 gross for unauthorised deduction (bonus)
  • Total: £3,423 gross

Lessons & takeaways

  • Even with less than two years' service, you can claim for unpaid notice pay and bonuses if they are contractual entitlements.
  • A contract labelled 'Agreement to Supply Exclusive Services' does not automatically make you a worker – the tribunal will look at the reality of the working relationship.
  • If your employer offers pay in lieu of notice and you accept by resigning, they must honour that agreement.
  • A confirmed bonus that is due is part of your wages; withholding it without proper notice can be an unauthorised deduction.

When a restructuring offer turns into a dismissal

This case shows how a seemingly straightforward restructuring meeting can lead to a dispute over notice pay and bonuses. The former employee, a Natural Justice Administrator, had only been with GTEP Administration Limited for four months when the company announced a restructuring and offered 4 weeks' pay in lieu of notice to administration staff. He accepted the offer by resigning, but the company later dismissed him for alleged insubordination and failed to pay the notice pay or a quarterly bonus that had been confirmed by his line manager.

What the tribunal decided

The tribunal first had to establish the claimant's employment status. Despite the contract being titled 'Agreement to Supply Exclusive Services', the tribunal found he was an employee under a contract of service. This was crucial because only employees can claim breach of contract and unauthorised deductions. The unfair dismissal claim was struck out due to insufficient service (less than two years), but the other claims succeeded.

The respondent argued the claimant was a worker, not an employee, and that no notice pay or bonus was due. However, the tribunal noted that the respondent had confirmed the notice pay in writing and that the bonus was a contractual entitlement. The respondent's failure to pay these amounts amounted to a breach of contract and an unauthorised deduction from wages.

What the losing side could have done differently

The respondent could have avoided this outcome by honouring its own written commitments. It offered 4 weeks' pay in lieu of notice and confirmed the bonus after a successful appraisal. Instead of paying these sums, it dismissed the claimant and refused to pay. The respondent also failed to attend the hearing, which meant the tribunal decided the case based on the claimant's evidence alone.

Why this matters for similar claims

This case is a reminder that employment status is determined by the reality of the working relationship, not the label on the contract. Even short-service employees have rights to contractual payments like notice pay and bonuses. If an employer makes a promise in writing, they must keep it – or face a claim for breach of contract and unauthorised deductions.

Similar cases