Case 1406519/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 1406519/2020
- Decision date
- 24 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smail
- Venue
- Exeter
- Panel members
- Ms R. Clarke, Ms R. Hewitt-Grey
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the liability hearing at Exeter before Employment Judge Smail, with Ms R. Clarke and Ms R. Hewitt-Grey sitting as lay members, the tribunal held that Mr P. Tilden was unfairly dismissed by Cambian Group Limited. The judgment also records that the holiday pay claim had been satisfied.
The tribunal did not finally determine the notice claim: judgment on the breach of contract claim was reserved to the remedy hearing. It dismissed all other claims in the case.
The judgment contains no reasons beyond those short disposals. It directed a further one-day remedy hearing by video for 16 September 2022, so no monetary award was fixed in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment records that the holiday pay claim had been satisfied; no sum is set out. | Settled | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Judgment on the notice claim was reserved to the remedy hearing. | Other | — | — |
| Other | The judgment states that all other claims are dismissed, but it does not identify them individually in the extracted text. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.