Case 1303365/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In Person v Mr. E. Walker, Consultant — 2024
- Case reference
- 1303365/2023
- Decision date
- 2 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wedderspoon Members
- Venue
- Birmingham
- Panel members
- Mr R.S. Virdee, Mr J. Reeves
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that the respondent dismissed the claimant on 8 March 2023 and that the claim for unfair dismissal was well founded and succeeded. The Tribunal concluded that adoption of a different procedure would have resulted in a fair dismissal of the claimant by reason of misconduct within 4 weeks of 8 March 2023. An ACAS uplift of 20% was applied to the compensatory award, and the Tribunal found the claimant guilty of blameworthy conduct, assessing contributory fault at 50% and reducing the basic award by 50% on the same basis.
The claimant was awarded a basic award of £3,692.32 (including deductions) and a compensatory award of £924.15, reflecting four weeks net wage and pension loss and including the ACAS uplift and the deduction for contributory fault. The total monetary award payable for unfair dismissal was £4,616.47, with a prescribed element of £924.15 covering the period 9 March 2023 to 2 August 2024.
The Tribunal dismissed the claims of discrimination because of pregnancy and/or maternity, the claims of direct sex discrimination, and the claims of harassment related to sex, finding none of them well founded. The claim of indirect sex discrimination was dismissed upon withdrawal. Written reasons were not provided as reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Unfair dismissal succeeded. Tribunal found a fair procedure would have resulted in dismissal within 4 weeks; ACAS uplift of 20% applied to compensatory award; basic award reduced by 50% and compensatory award reduced by 50% for contributory/blameworthy conduct. | Upheld | — | £4,616 |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Claims of discrimination because of pregnancy and/or maternity not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Sex discrimination | Claims of direct sex discrimination not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Sex discrimination | Indirect sex discrimination claim dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Sex | — |
| Harassment | Claims of harassment related to sex not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,616
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,692
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £924
- 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.