Case 1402998/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Christopher Dunn v The Social Bar and Eatery Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1402998/2022
- Decision date
- 9 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hay Representation
- Venue
- via VHS
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Christopher Dunn
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that The Social Bar and Eatery Limited was in breach of contract by dismissing Christopher Dunn without notice. It ordered the respondent to pay £1,140.00 gross damages for that breach and then increased the award by 25%, adding £285.00 gross, because the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures applied and the respondent had unreasonably failed to comply with it.
The tribunal also upheld a claim for unlawful deduction from wages and awarded £581.74 net. In addition, it awarded £99.75 gross for outstanding holiday pay due at termination, recording that issue as an unlawful deduction from wages by failing to pay holiday pay to which the claimant was entitled at the date of termination. The judgment records a total monetary award of £2,106.49.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Dismissal without notice; damages of £1,140 gross plus a 25% ACAS uplift of £285 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,425 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Net award for unlawful deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £582 |
| Holiday pay | Gross award for outstanding holiday pay due at termination; the judgment framed this as an unlawful deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £100 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,106
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures
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.