Case 1403342/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Evans v Atalian Servest AMK Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 1403342/2020
- Decision date
- 19 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fowell Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Evans
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Fowell heard the case at Bristol by video on 12 and 13 May 2021. The claimant was Mr G Evans and the respondent was Atalian Servest AMK Ltd. The judgment record states that the tribunal gave oral reasons at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The tribunal held that the claimant’s dismissal was fair. On that basis, the unfair dismissal complaint failed. The tribunal also rejected the associated contractual and wage claims, finding that the dismissal was not in breach of contract and that there had been no unlawful deduction from wages.
The tribunal further found that there had been no breach by the respondent of the Working Time Regulations 1998. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment record.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.