Case 1304301/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs E Goodwin (Solicitor) For v Mr PV Hall (Director) — 2019
- Case reference
- 1304301/2018
- Decision date
- 23 May 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gaskell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs E Goodwin (Solicitor) For
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting at Newcastle-under-Lyme on 22 and 23 May 2019 before Employment Judge Gaskell, found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed by the respondent, Edwin Lawton Limited. It awarded compensation of £10,808.00 in total. The judgment records a basic award of £4,848.00 and a compensatory award made up of £5,030.00 for past and future loss of earnings, £630.00 for loss of pension, and £300.00 for loss of statutory rights.
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 and awarded compensation totalling £10,808.00, made up of a basic award and compensatory components for loss of earnings, pension, and statutory rights. | Upheld | — | £10,808 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal also found the claimant was wrongfully dismissed in breach of contract, but recorded that there was no separate award for wrongful dismissal. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,808
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £4,848
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £5,960
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.