Case 1400375/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr DW James Second Claimant: Mrs G Maundrell First v Elite Security Manned Guarding Limited Second Respondent: Hammond Corporate Facilities Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1400375/2019
- Decision date
- 28 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge J Bax Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr DW James Second Claimant: Mrs G Maundrell First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Bristol on 28 August 2019, Employment Judge J Bax dismissed all claims against the First Respondent. The tribunal also dismissed the claims for redundancy payments against the Second Respondent and the Second Claimant's unlawful deductions claim against the Second Respondent. It found, however, that the Second Respondent had unlawfully deducted £92.05 from the First Claimant's wages, had breached contract by dismissing the Second Claimant without notice, and had automatically unfairly dismissed both claimants.
On remedy, the First Claimant was awarded £92.05 for unlawful deduction from wages and £5,051.06 for automatic unfair dismissal, made up of a basic award of £1,090.80 and compensatory losses for earnings, pension contribution loss and loss of statutory rights. The Second Claimant was awarded £3,371.24 for automatic unfair dismissal, made up of a basic award of £2,181.60, loss of earnings/notice pay and £500 for loss of statutory rights; no separate award was made for her breach of contract claim. The combined award was £8,514.35.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment states that all claims against the First Respondent were dismissed, but it does not break those claims down by legal head. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Claims for redundancy payments against the Second Respondent were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Second Claimant's unlawful deductions claim against the Second Respondent was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Second Respondent unlawfully deducted £92.05 gross from the First Claimant's wages. | Upheld | — | £92 |
| Breach of contract | The Second Respondent breached contract by dismissing the Second Claimant without notice; no separate award was made. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The First Claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed; the award was £5,051.06. | Upheld | — | £5,051 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,514
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,272
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £5,058
- 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.