Case 1403714/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Janet Fisher v Bakers Arms 2019 Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 1403714/2019
- Decision date
- 7 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dawson Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Janet Fisher
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that Janet Fisher's unfair dismissal claim against Bakers Arms 2019 Limited was well founded. The judgment states that, by consent, the basic award was assessed at £5,295.50 and the compensatory award at nil, and that the respondent was ordered to pay the basic award to the claimant.
The tribunal also found that the respondent was in breach of the claimant's contract of employment by failing to pay notice. By consent, damages for that claim were assessed at £2,119.18 and ordered to be paid to the claimant. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the unfair dismissal claim well founded. The basic award was assessed by consent at £5,295.50 and the compensatory award was assessed at nil. | Upheld | — | £5,296 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent was in breach of contract in failing to pay notice. Damages were assessed by consent at £2,119.18. | Upheld | — | £2,119 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,415
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £5,296
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £0
- 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.