Case 1400771/2019 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Not attending — 2020
- Case reference
- 1400771/2019
- Decision date
- 7 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Southampton on 7 February 2020, Employment Judge Rayner heard Ms Sullivan's equal pay claim. The tribunal found that the claimant's work was equal to that of her comparator, Mr C Bernson, in that it was "like work". On that basis it upheld the equal pay complaint against the first respondent, Solent Composite Systems Ltd.
The first respondent was ordered to pay £9,113.24 in total, comprising £9,008.87 net as compensation for past pay inequality and £104.37 for copying and associated costs incurred in bringing the claim. The claim against the second respondent, Solent Composite Solutions Ltd, was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | The tribunal found the claimant's work was equal to that of comparator Mr C Bernson in that it was like work. It ordered the first respondent to pay £9,113.24 in total, and dismissed the claim against the second respondent. | Upheld | — | £9,113 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,113
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £9,009
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- like work
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.