Case 1300345/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Beckford v TRW UK Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1300345/2020
- Decision date
- 13 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Meichen
- Venue
- Birmingham
- Panel members
- Mr R White, Mrs S Bannister
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Beckford
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Mr G Beckford was unfairly dismissed by TRW UK Ltd. It rejected his claims that he had been directly discriminated against because of race and/or age, and it also rejected his victimisation claim under section 27 of the Equality Act 2010.
For remedy, the parties agreed a basic award of £14,962. They also agreed that loss of earnings should be compensated for the period between 30 September 2019 and 30 June 2020, in the amount of £2,396.05, but that he should not be compensated for loss of earnings beyond 30 June 2020.
The tribunal stated that neither the basic award nor the compensatory award should be reduced for any conduct or action of the claimant. It found there was a percentage chance that he could have been fairly dismissed and applied a 15% deduction to the compensatory award, amounting to £359.41, which reduced the compensatory award to £2,036.64.
The respondent was ordered to pay a basic award of £14,962 and a compensatory award of £2,036.64. The tribunal also recorded that the recoupment regulations did not apply.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed. The parties agreed a basic award of £14,962 and a compensatory loss figure for 30 September 2019 to 30 June 2020, with a 15% deduction for the chance of a fair dismissal; the final compensatory award was £2,036.64. | Upheld | — | £16,999 |
| Race discrimination | The tribunal found the claimant was not directly discriminated against because of race. The judgment disposes of the race and age direct discrimination issues together as 'race and/or age'. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | The tribunal found the claimant was not directly discriminated against because of age. The judgment disposes of the race and age direct discrimination issues together as 'race and/or age'. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal found the claimant was not victimised within the meaning of section 27 of the Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £16,999
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £14,962
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £2,037
- compensatory remedy recorded
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.