Case 1404444/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P. Dowdle v Apollo Radiators Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1404444/2022
- Decision date
- 19 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G. King Representation
- Venue
- Bristol ET
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P. Dowdle
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal at Bristol Employment Tribunal on 27-28 September 2023, before Employment Judge G. King, held that Mr P. Dowdle's unfair dismissal claim against Apollo Radiators Ltd was well founded and succeeded. The judgment records a basic award of £14,560.50 and a further £500.00 for loss of statutory rights.
The compensatory award was assessed at £5,016.47, made up of £749.57 for loss of earnings for 9 November 2022 to 14 November 2022, £4,168.26 for 18 weeks' difference in earnings, and £98.64 for 18 weeks' difference in pension contributions. That compensatory award was uplifted by 25% because the respondent failed to follow the ACAS Code, producing an uplifted award of £6,270.59 and a total sum payable of £21,331.09.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the unfair dismissal claim well founded. It awarded a basic award of £14,560.50, £500.00 for loss of statutory rights, and a compensatory award of £5,016.47 comprising £749.57 for loss of earnings (9 November 2022 to 14 November 2022), £4,168.26 for 18 weeks' difference in earnings, and £98.64 for 18 weeks' difference in pension contributions. The compensatory award was then uplifted by 25% for failure to follow the ACAS Code, producing £6,270.59, and the total payable was £21,331.09. | Upheld | — | £21,331 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £21,331
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £14,561
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £5,016
- 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.