Case 1306798/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Francis Mortin, counsel v Mr David Mayor, former director — 2021
- Case reference
- 1306798/2020
- Decision date
- 4 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Coghlin QC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Francis Mortin, counsel
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting before Employment Judge T Coghlin QC on 2 and 3 August 2021, recorded that the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint succeeded. The award for that claim was £10,570.45, made up of £300 for loss of statutory rights and £10,270.45 for loss of earnings for the period from 3 April 2020 to 31 December 2020 inclusive, with mitigation taken into account. The tribunal also stated, for the purposes of Regulation 4(8) of the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseekers Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996, that the claimant had neither received nor claimed the specified benefits for the relevant period.
By consent, the wrongful dismissal claim succeeded, but no separate award was made because that would have duplicated the compensatory award for unfair dismissal; the amount otherwise payable was stated to be £2,340 gross. By consent, the tribunal also held that the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,362.50 and that the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of the week commencing 23 March 2020 succeeded, with £637.50 gross ordered to be paid.
The tribunal further declared that the respondent had failed to provide itemised pay statements as required by section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996 from 12 May 2019 until the claimant's employment ended on 2 April 2020. It also found a failure to provide written particulars of employment under section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996 and made an award of £1,050 under section 38 Employment Act 2002, representing two weeks' pay at the capped weekly rate of £525.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal recorded that the unfair dismissal complaint succeeded. The award of £10,570.45 comprised £300 for loss of statutory rights and £10,270.45 for loss of earnings from 3 April 2020 to 31 December 2020 inclusive, taking mitigation into account. For Regulation 4(8) purposes, the tribunal was satisfied the claimant had neither received nor claimed the specified benefits for the relevant period. | Upheld | — | £10,570 |
| Wrongful dismissal | By consent, the wrongful dismissal claim succeeded. No separate award was made to avoid double recovery with the unfair dismissal award; the sum otherwise payable was stated to be £2,340 gross. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | By consent, the claimant was held entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,362.50. | Upheld | — | £2,363 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | By consent, the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of the week commencing 23 March 2020 succeeded. The respondent was ordered to pay £637.50 gross. | Upheld | — | £638 |
| Other | The tribunal declared that the respondent failed to provide itemised pay statements as required by section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996 from 12 May 2019 until 2 April 2020. It also found a failure to provide written particulars of employment under section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996 and awarded £1,050 under section 38 Employment Act 2002, representing two weeks' pay capped at £525 per week. | Upheld |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,620
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £10,570
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
4 references- Regulation 4(8) of the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Jobseekers Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996
- section 8 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
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.