Case 1403820/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 1403820/2023
- Decision date
- 6 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Marie Anne Stout was unfairly dismissed by Coram UK Holdings Ltd. The judgment records that the hearing took place at Southampton by CVP on 21 and 22 February 2024, with Employment Judge Rayner sitting alone.
In the remedies section, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £5,995.50. It also found that the claimant could have been fairly dismissed following a fair procedure on 30 January 2023, and on that basis no compensation was payable. No separate award for injury to feelings, interest, or other heads of loss is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed and awarded a basic award of £5,995.50. It also stated that the claimant could have been fairly dismissed following a fair procedure on 30 January 2023, so no compensation was payable. | Upheld | — | £5,996 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,996
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £5,996
- 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.