Case 1400549/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Grant v C & L Traffic Management Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1400549/2024
- Decision date
- 14 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Grant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Bristol by video on 26 November 2024 before Employment Judge Midgley. The respondent did not enter a response and did not attend or represent itself. The judgment was therefore given under Rule 21. The claimant appeared in person.
The claimant's race discrimination claim was dismissed following its withdrawal by the claimant. The judgment records that the race discrimination complaint did not proceed to a merits finding.
The tribunal found the claims for unfair dismissal and unauthorised deductions from wages well founded and they succeeded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay a total of £7,178.
The award comprised £543 for unauthorised deduction of wages and £6,635 for unfair dismissal. The unfair dismissal sum was made up of a basic award of £1,629, £300 for loss of statutory protection, and a compensatory award of £4,706.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Found well founded in a Rule 21 judgment after the respondent failed to enter a response. | Upheld | — | £6,635 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Found well founded in a Rule 21 judgment after the respondent failed to enter a response. | Upheld | — | £543 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,178
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,629
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £4,706
- 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.