Case 1305616/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Butt, claimant’s wife For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 1305616/2023
- Decision date
- 6 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dimbylow Signed
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mrs S Butt, claimant’s wife For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Mr U Butt's claim for unfair dismissal was well founded and declared that he had been unfairly dismissed by 2 Sisters Food Group Ltd. It calculated a basic award of £905.96 and a compensatory award of £5,668.41. The compensatory award was made up of £4,991.87 for 13 weeks' loss of earnings, £176.54 for loss of pension payments, and £500 for loss of statutory employment rights.
The tribunal then found that the claimant had contributed to his dismissal to the extent of 50% and reduced both the basic and compensatory awards by that amount. The total amount payable by the respondent was £3,287.18. The judgment also records that recoupment of benefits did not apply because the claimant did not receive any state benefits.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal upheld the unfair dismissal claim, reduced the basic and compensatory awards by 50% for contribution, and recorded £3,287.18 as the total payable. | Upheld | — | £3,287 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,287
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £453
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £2,834
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.