Case 1406109/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Clinton Taylor v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 1406109/2020
- Decision date
- 27 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fowell Claimant
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Clinton Taylor
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded judgment that Mr Clinton Taylor was unfairly dismissed by Royal Mail Group Limited. The written record does not set out detailed reasons, noting that reasons were given orally at the hearing and written reasons would only be provided if requested.
The tribunal ordered reinstatement to the claimant's former employment by Monday 29 November 2021. It directed the respondent to treat the claimant as if he had not been dismissed, pay £1,700 for pay he might reasonably have expected to receive between termination and reinstatement, restore his pension entitlements, and restore his shares subject to credit for the amount received on termination for the shares.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and orders reinstatement, restoration of pension entitlements and shares, and payment of £1,700 for pay he might reasonably have expected to receive between termination and reinstatement. | Upheld | — | £1,700 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,700
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,700
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.