Case 1301049/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Edgington v Guhring Limited FINAL HEARING — 2022
- Case reference
- 1301049/2021
- Decision date
- 22 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Camp Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Edgington
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the final hearing on 21 to 22 June 2022 before Employment Judge Camp, the tribunal held that Mr D Edgington was unfairly and wrongfully dismissed by Guhring Limited. The reasons were given orally and no written reasons were to be provided unless requested within 14 days.
On unfair dismissal, the tribunal stated that any compensatory award would be nil in accordance with the Polkey principle. It also said the basic award was reduced by 50 percent because of conduct before dismissal under section 122(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The remedy was agreed as a basic award of £7,666.50.
On wrongful dismissal, the tribunal said the claimant must give credit for his earnings during the contractual notice period. Damages were assessed at £6,208, inclusive of a 15 percent uplift for unreasonable failure to follow the Acas Code of Practice 1 under section 207A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The total payable was £13,874.50.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed. It stated that any compensatory award would be nil under the Polkey principle, and the basic award was reduced by 50 percent because of conduct before dismissal. | Upheld | — | £7,667 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was wrongfully dismissed. Damages were assessed at £6,208 inclusive of a 15 percent uplift under section 207A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, and the claimant was required to give credit for earnings during his contractual notice period. | Upheld | — | £6,208 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,875
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £7,667
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £0
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
4 references- Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd [1987] UKHL 8
- section 123(6) of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 122(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 207A of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
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.