Case 1401931/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Passman, representative For the v No Ordinary Designer Label Ltd (in Administration) — 2020
- Case reference
- 1401931/2020
- Decision date
- 26 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dawson Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Passman, representative For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal at Southampton, heard by video on 10 November 2020 before Employment Judge Dawson, recorded that Miss A Gray’s claim of unfair dismissal was well-founded. It ordered the respondent, No Ordinary Designer Label Limited, to pay a basic award of £196.92 and a compensatory award of £1,612.46.
The tribunal also found that the respondent was in breach of the claimant’s contract and ordered payment of £393.84. The written record states that the reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the unfair dismissal claim well-founded and awarded a basic award of £196.92 and a compensatory award of £1,612.46. | Upheld | — | £1,809 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent was in breach of contract and ordered payment of £393.84. | Upheld | — | £394 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,203
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £197
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £1,612
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.