Case 1404022/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Vincent v Mark's Mobile Butchers Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1404022/2023
- Decision date
- 27 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Vincent
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claim at Southampton by video on 14 and 15 March 2024 before Employment Judge Gray. It held that Mr C Vincent’s complaint of unfair dismissal succeeded because the dismissal was procedurally unfair, although the tribunal accepted redundancy as the fair reason for dismissal.
The tribunal recorded that the Claimant had already received a statutory redundancy payment, so no basic award was payable. It found that a fair process would have taken a further eight weeks. By consent, the compensatory award was assessed at £222.40 net and the Respondent was ordered to pay that sum to the Claimant.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal was procedurally unfair, but for the fair reason of redundancy. The Claimant had already received a statutory redundancy payment, so no basic award was due. The compensatory award was fixed by consent at the net sum of £222.40. | Upheld | — | £222 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £222
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £222
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.