Case 1402491/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Paul Maidment v Making Waves Audio Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1402491/2020
- Decision date
- 11 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge David Hughes
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Paul Maidment
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe record notes that the tribunal sat at Bristol before Employment Judge David Hughes and that reasons were given orally at the hearing. It does not set out separate findings on each head of claim; instead, it records that the claims in case numbers 1402491/2020 and 140516/2020 were not well-founded in their entirety and were dismissed.
The tribunal also ordered Mr Maidment to pay the respondent's costs of £3,000 plus £600 VAT under Rule 76(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013. The written record says written reasons would not be provided unless requested by either party within 14 days of the sending of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,600
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.