Case 1802474/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Harty (counsel) For the v Ms Kennedy-Curnow (Peninsula) — 2023
- Case reference
- 1802474/2022
- Decision date
- 8 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies Appearances
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Harty (counsel) For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that the claimant, Mr D Wade, succeeded in his complaint of unfair dismissal. It found that the chance he would have been fairly dismissed in any event was nil.
On remedy, the tribunal found that Mr Wade had not failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate his loss. It awarded a basic award of £1,632 and a compensatory award of £37,440.52, describing the compensatory figure as the capped amount of 52 weeks' pay calculated under sections 124(1)(b), 220 and 221 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The calculation was based on gross weekly pay of £692.31 and employer pension contributions of £120 per month, or £27.70 per week.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £39,073 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £39,073
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,632
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £37,441
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.124(1)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.220 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.221 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.