Case 1311266/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Pugh v Severn Trent Water Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 1311266/2020
- Decision date
- 1 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cookson
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Pugh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Cookson sat alone at Birmingham by CVP on 27 and 28 September 2021. The judgment records that Mr S Pugh’s unfair dismissal claim under section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was dismissed because the tribunal found he had not been unfairly dismissed.
The claimant’s breach of contract claim was also not upheld and was dismissed. The published record does not set out separate written reasons, because the tribunal notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The claimant’s unlawful deduction from wages claim was not pursued and was dismissed. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim under s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996; tribunal found the claimant was not unfairly dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim not upheld and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim was not pursued and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.94 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.