Case 1400229/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N. Cook v Arc Energy Resources Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1400229/2022
- Decision date
- 31 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G. King Representation
- Venue
- Bristol ET
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N. Cook
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 14 August 2023 at Bristol Employment Tribunal, Employment Judge G. King recorded that the claimant, Mr N. Cook, appeared in person and the respondent did not attend. The tribunal held that the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal was well founded and that the respondent had unfairly dismissed him.
The written record does not set out detailed reasons beyond the outcome, and it notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing. The judgment records the remedy ordered: a basic award of £15,776 and a compensatory award of £36,545. The compensatory award included a 25% uplift for breach of the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint well founded. It ordered a basic award of £15,776 and a compensatory award of £36,545, with the compensatory award including a 25% uplift for breach of the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. | Upheld | — | £52,321 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £52,321
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £15,776
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £36,545
- 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.