Case 1309170/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v - No Appearance — 2020
- Case reference
- 1309170/2019
- Decision date
- 13 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harding
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis judgment records the remedy hearing in Ms M Beauchamp v Samy Ltd, held at Birmingham on 13 October 2020 by CVP before Employment Judge Harding. The respondent had no appearance and no ET3 was entered. The tribunal dealt only with remedy, not liability, and ordered payment for unpaid holiday pay and unfair dismissal.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £1,514.24 for unpaid holiday pay. It described that sum as a gross figure calculated by reference to 5.6 weeks per year at £135.20 over two years. It also ordered £540.80 for unfair dismissal, and the stated calculation shows that this was treated as a basic award based on age 33 at dismissal, multiplier 1, and four years' complete service at £135.20 x 4.
The total award recorded by the judgment is £2,055.04. No compensatory award, injury to feelings award, or interest is mentioned in the extracted judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Tribunal ordered unpaid holiday pay of £1,514.24, described as a gross figure calculated at 5.6 weeks per year x £135.20 x 2 years. | Upheld | — | £1,514 |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment awards £540.80 for unfair dismissal and states the calculation as a basic award using age 33 at dismissal, multiplier 1, and 4 years' complete service at £135.20 x 4. | Upheld | — | £541 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,055
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £541
- statutory, unfair dismissal
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.