Case 1402341/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Shardlow v R5 MSS Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 1402341/2024
- Decision date
- 14 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Brown Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Shardlow
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Bristol by video on 19 September 2025 before Employment Judge T Brown. The claimant, Mr B Shardlow, appeared in person. The respondent, R5 MSS Ltd, was not present or represented. The tribunal gave judgment orally on 19 September 2025 and the written record states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
The tribunal declared that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. It awarded a basic award of £2,100 and a compensatory award of £12,112.11 in respect of that claim.
The tribunal also ordered the respondent to pay £1,912.44, described as accrued but untaken annual leave as at the date of termination of employment, after deductions for tax and National Insurance. No separate detailed reasons appear in the written record beyond the formal outcome and awards.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal declared that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and awarded a basic award of £2,100 and a compensatory award of £12,112.11. | Upheld | — | £14,212 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal ordered payment of £1,912.44, described as accrued but untaken annual leave as at the date of termination, after deductions for tax and National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £1,912 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £16,125
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,100
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £12,112
- 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.