Case 1405326/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Bounty (UK) Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1405326/2020
- Decision date
- 16 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lowe Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal upheld Ms C Baker’s claim of unfair dismissal against Bounty (UK) Limited. The extracted judgment record does not set out the tribunal’s oral reasons in writing; it records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested. The available text therefore confirms the outcome but does not include a fuller narrative of the liability findings.
The judgment records the compensation calculation made on the unfair dismissal claim. The basic award was assessed at £1,800. The compensatory award was made up of £2,459.28 for loss of earnings and commission over 26 weeks, a 20% ACAS uplift of £491.85, and £200 for loss of statutory rights, producing a compensatory subtotal of £3,151.13.
The total award recorded by the tribunal was £4,951.13, comprising the basic award and compensatory award together. No separate discrimination, whistleblowing, wage, or other heads of claim are identified in the written record provided.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £4,951 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,951
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,800
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £3,151
- 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.