Why Tribunals Must Explain Their Calculations

Understanding Khan (Executor) v Vijendran [2025] EAT 125
When someone doesn’t send their defence to the Employment Tribunal, the case can go ahead without them.
But even then, the tribunal must still be fair — especially when deciding how much money is owed.
That’s what happened in this recent EAT case.
What Happened
A claimant won her redundancy and holiday pay claim because her former employer hadn’t sent an ET3 defence.
The employer had since passed away, and his executor tried to take part in the hearing just to check the figures.
The tribunal refused, saying he wasn’t allowed to say anything at all.
It then issued an order for payment but gave no reasons explaining how the amounts were worked out.
The executor appealed — and won.
Why the Appeal Succeeded
The EAT said fairness still matters, even when one side has defaulted.
“There is no absolute rule that a respondent debarred from defending liability is thereby prevented from being heard on remedy.”
In plain English: even if you’ve lost the case because no defence was filed, you can still have your written comments on the amount considered.
The judge also criticised the lack of explanation:
“A default judgment cannot be a licence for opacity.”
That means the tribunal can’t just list a figure without showing how it was reached.
Both sides — and the appeal court — must be able to follow the maths.
What This Means for You
If you’re involved in a case where the other side doesn’t respond, the tribunal still has to explain its decision.
And if you’re the party who defaulted, you can still write to the tribunal with your calculations or evidence on how much should be paid.
They must look at what you send, even if you can’t attend the hearing.
5 Practical Takeaways for Claimants
- Always explain your figures. Show clearly how you worked them out.
- Ask for written reasons. You’re entitled to understand how the decision was made.
- Expect fairness. Even if the other side didn’t defend, the tribunal must act transparently.
- If you’re responding late, send your figures anyway — they should still be read.
- Keep everything clear and in writing. Clarity protects you on appeal.
Sources
- Khan (Executor) v Vijendran [2025] EAT 125
- Office Equipment Systems v Hughes [1990] ICR 854
- Talash Hotels v Smith (EAT, UKEAT/0191/13)
Where this sits in a claim
Take this further
If this helped and you want more than the free guide, there are two ways to go further:


