Case 1402613/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Marsh v Mr A Bunn — 2020
- Case reference
- 1402613/2019
- Decision date
- 14 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Representation
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Marsh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Southampton on 14 February 2020 before Employment Judge Rayner sitting alone. It recorded that the claimant, Mr P Marsh, was entitled to redundancy pay and that the respondent had made an unlawful deduction from wages.
On the redundancy issue, the tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment of £3,000. It ordered payment of the outstanding balance of £1,135.54, payable forthwith.
On the wages issue, the tribunal found that the respondent had made an unlawful deduction from the claimant’s wages of £400 and ordered that sum to be paid. The total sum ordered by the judgment was £1,535.54.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment of £3,000 and ordered the balance of £1,135.54 to be paid forthwith. | Upheld | — | £1,136 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unlawful deduction from wages of £400 and ordered that sum to be paid to the claimant. | Upheld | — | £400 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,536
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.