Case 1602386/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Dimond v MKK Hotels Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1602386/2020
- Decision date
- 15 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ward Tribunal
- Venue
- Cardiff
- Panel members
- Tribunal Member Fryer, Tribunal Member Owen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Dimond
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Ward sat with Tribunal Members Fryer and Owen at Cardiff on 2 September 2021. The written judgment records that Miss C Dimond's claim succeeded and that she was sexually harassed on 7 March 2020. The reasons were given orally at the hearing, so the written record does not set out the tribunal's detailed reasoning or factual findings beyond that conclusion.
MKK Hotels Ltd was ordered to pay £18,408.82. The order comprised a compensatory award of £5,877.30, injury to feelings of £8,000, £1,469.33 for failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice, £1,809.60 for failure to provide a statement of terms and conditions, and £1,252.59 interest. The tribunal also recommended that by 16 September 2021 the respondent provide outstanding payslips and P60s and either provide shifts or take the steps needed to enable a P45.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | The written record states that the claimant was sexually harassed on 7 March 2020 and that the claim succeeded. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, so the written judgment does not set out detailed findings or apportion the monetary order between the harassment award and the separate statement-of-terms sum. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Other | The order includes a separate sum of £1,809.60 for failure to provide a statement of terms and conditions. The written record does not identify the statutory basis for that sum or give separate reasons. | Upheld | — | £1,810 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £18,409
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £5,877
- 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.