Edam Group Ltd (In Administration) and The Secretary of State For Business and Trade

Case Summary

Four claimants brought claims for unpaid wages, holiday pay, redundancy pay and notice pay following the administration of Edam Group Ltd. The claimants contended they were employees entitled to these sums, whilst the respondent employer contended they were zero hour casual workers. The tribunal dismissed all claims because the claimants failed to attend the hearing and provided no evidence or witness statements in support of their claims despite directions to do so.

The claims were dismissed because there was no evidence before the tribunal to support them. The claimants failed to attend the hearing and provided no documents or witness statements despite directions requiring disclosure, agreed bundles and exchange of witness statements, and despite being reminded by email to supply documents they wished to rely on.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Whether claimants were employees or zero hour contract casual workers
• •Entitlement to unpaid wages, holiday pay, redundancy pay and notice pay
• •Liability of Secretary of State for Business and Trade

Case No: 1401224/2025 1401355/2025 1401361/2025 1401383/2025 ---1--- EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS BETWEEN Claimants Respondent MR D HARRIES (C1) MR D OWENS (C2) MR J WRIGHT (C3) MR I WOODHOUSE (C4) AND EDAM GROUP LTD (IN ADMINISTRATION) (R1) THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR BUSINESS AND TRADE (R2) JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL HELD AT: BRISTOL ON: 8 TH MAY 2026 EMPLOYMENT JUDGE MR P CADNEY (SITTING ALONE) MEMBERS: APPEARANCES:- FOR THE CLAIMANTS:- NO ATTENDANCE FOR THE RESPONDENT:- NO ATTENDANCE (R1) NO ATTENDANCE (R2) JUDGMENT The judgment of the tribunal is that:- i) The claimants’ claims against R1 and R2 are dismissed. Case No: 1401224/2025 1401355/2025 1401361/2025 1401383/2025 ---2--- Reasons Claims 1. By these claims the claimants all bring claims for unpaid wages and/or holiday pay and redundancy pay and notice pay arising from the termination of their employment when the first respondent ceased to trade and entered administration. 2. First respondent – The administrators entered responses to all four claims stating that the claimants were zero hour contract casual workers and not employees; and that they had no objection to the claims proceeding. They separately indicated that they did not intend to attend any tribunal hearings and R1 has not been represented today. 3. Second respondent – The SoS accepts that R1 is insolvent, but contends that the claims are premature in that no claim has been made to the RPS; and that it has not yet formed an opinion as to whether any sums are owed by the SoS. Similarly it does not intend to be represented at the hearing. The SoS’s position is slightly d…