Case 1406027/2019 · Employment Tribunal
- IN PERSON FOR THE v Sol Attendance Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1406027/2019
- Decision date
- 7 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgely
Parties
2 namedClaimant
- IN PERSON FOR THE
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent had not entered a valid response and did not attend the hearing or seek permission to participate. The tribunal therefore proceeded on the basis that there was no defence to the pleaded claims and no challenge to the claimant's evidence.
On unfair dismissal, the tribunal accepted the claimant's unchallenged evidence that, after a TUPE transfer, her contractual hours were reduced from 12.5 to 10 hours per week and her contractual long-service holiday entitlement was not honoured. The tribunal found she was entitled to judgment on the unfair dismissal claim, describing the breaches as fundamental breaches entitling her to resign.
On race discrimination, the tribunal accepted the claimant's unchallenged evidence that Polish employees were paid more than her for the same work. It found that this satisfied stage 1 of the Igen v Wong test and shifted the burden of proof, which the respondent did not discharge. The tribunal also upheld the unpaid notice pay claim because the claimant's constructive dismissal claim had succeeded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment upheld the claim of unfair dismissal. In the reasons, the tribunal referred to automatic unfair dismissal and/or ordinary unfair dismissal based on fundamental breach, and also referred to the claimant's constructive dismissal succeeding for notice pay purposes. | Upheld | — | £6,481 |
| Race discrimination | The judgment upheld direct race discrimination. The award comprised £6,000 injury to feelings and £400 interest. | Upheld | Race | £6,400 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment described this as a claim for unpaid notice pay and awarded statutory notice pay. | Upheld | — | £1,178 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,059
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,128
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £5,353
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
3 references- Igen v Wong test
- Vento guidelines
- rule 20 of the ET's rules of procedure
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.