Case 1400240/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Parkin v Landmarc Support Services Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 1400240/2019
- Decision date
- 19 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Reed
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Parkin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Southampton on 24 and 25 October 2019, Employment Judge Reed sitting alone held that Mr P Parkin was unfairly dismissed and wrongfully dismissed by Landmarc Support Services Ltd. The judgment also records that it was just and equitable that any award of compensation should be reduced by 20%.
After those declarations were made, the respondent agreed to pay Mr Parkin £27,323.49, and the written record states that the claim was dismissed on withdrawal. The judgment says written reasons will not be provided because reasons were given orally at the hearing, and it gives no further breakdown of the agreed sum.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. It also stated that any award of compensation should be reduced by 20%. The written record then states that, after the respondent agreed to pay £27,323.49, the claim was dismissed on withdrawal. | Upheld | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found that the claimant was wrongfully dismissed. The written record then states that, after the respondent agreed to pay £27,323.49, the claim was dismissed on withdrawal. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £27,323
- across all upheld claims
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.