Case 1303216/2018 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr D Brown, Director — 2019
- Case reference
- 1303216/2018
- Decision date
- 28 January 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dimbylow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Birmingham on 23 January 2019, Employment Judge Dimbylow heard Mr J Scopel's claims against Darker Enterprises Ltd. The tribunal recorded claims for damages for breach of contract over notice, failure to provide itemised payslips, automatic unfair dismissal because of health and safety reasons, automatic unfair dismissal because of asserting a statutory right, and unlawful deductions from wages/bonus.
The tribunal held that the breach of contract claim, the itemised payslips claim, and both automatic unfair dismissal claims were not well-founded and were dismissed. The judgment states that the health and safety and statutory-right dismissal claims failed. No written reasons were provided because reasons were given orally at the hearing and no request for written reasons was made.
By consent, the unlawful deductions claim succeeded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant compensation in the agreed sum of £159.88.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim for failure to provide itemised payslips. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim for damages over notice pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Automatic unfair dismissal allegation based on health and safety reasons. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Automatic unfair dismissal allegation based on asserting a statutory right. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | By consent; agreed sum of £159.88. | Settled | — | £160 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £160
- across all upheld claims
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.