Case 1401121/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Compton v Fawn Interiors Studio Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1401121/2023
- Decision date
- 4 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray-Jones Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Compton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting by CVP at Bristol before Employment Judge Gray-Jones, found that the respondent did not have lawful grounds to dismiss Mr S Compton without notice or pay in lieu of notice. The breach of contract claim was therefore well-founded, and the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £3,333.33 gross in respect of the notice period.
The tribunal also found that, on termination of employment, the respondent failed to make a payment for accrued outstanding annual leave due under the Working Time Regulations 1998. The holiday pay claim was therefore well-founded, and the tribunal ordered payment of £923.10 gross. The total award recorded was £4,256.43.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent had no lawful grounds to dismiss the claimant without notice or pay in lieu of notice and awarded £3,333.33 gross for the notice period. | Upheld | — | £3,333 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that on termination the respondent did not pay the claimant for accrued outstanding annual leave under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and awarded £923.10 gross. | Upheld | — | £923 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,256
- 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.