Case 1800656/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Simmons v D Howe Haulage Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1800656/2021
- Decision date
- 14 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shepherd Appearances
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Simmons
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal at Leeds, sitting by CVP on 14 September 2022 before Employment Judge Shepherd, dealt with claims between Mr K Simmons and D Howe Haulage Limited. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and therefore are not included in the judgment text provided.
The claimant's breach of contract claim for notice pay succeeded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay Mr Simmons £600 gross pay. No separate breakdown of the award is given in the extracted text, and no additional remedy components are recorded.
The judgment also states that the 'Employers Contract claim' was dismissed. The extracted text does not explain the basis of that claim or the tribunal's reasoning on it, so the summary is limited to the outcome recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim for notice pay succeeded; tribunal ordered payment of £600 gross pay. | Upheld | — | £600 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records that the 'Employers Contract claim' was dismissed. The extracted text does not give any further particulars. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £600
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £600
- 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.