Case 1401718/2020 · Employment Tribunal
- MR M BLITZ (COUNSEL) FOR THE v - Mr S Bee (director) — 2021
- Case reference
- 1401718/2020
- Decision date
- 24 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cadney Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
- MR M BLITZ (COUNSEL) FOR THE
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Bristol, Employment Judge Cadney heard the case on 11 and 12 February 2021. The tribunal held that Mr J Lea's claim for unfair dismissal was well founded and ordered Thomas Bee Limited to pay a compensatory award of £1,192.45. It also held that the claim for failure to supply full written particulars of employment was well founded and ordered payment of £1,050.
The tribunal dismissed the claims recorded as 'Unlawful Deduction from wages /breach of contract (notice pay)' and 'Unpaid Holiday pay'. The judgment therefore records two successful claims and two dismissed claims, with a total monetary award of £2,242.45. Judgment was sent to the parties on 24 February 2021.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,192 |
| Other | The judgment records this as a claim for failure to supply full written particulars of employment. | Upheld | — | £1,050 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment dismisses this claim in the combined form 'Unlawful Deduction from wages /breach of contract (notice pay)'. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,242
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,192
- 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.