Case 2200170/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Nigel Lapthorne v Entserve UK Ltd. — 2024
- Case reference
- 2200170/2021
- Decision date
- 8 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Freshwater Tribunal
- Panel members
- Mr M Simon, Mr J Carroll
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Nigel Lapthorne
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the London Central CVP hearing on 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 July 2023, before Employment Judge R Freshwater with Tribunal Member Mr M Simon and Tribunal Member Mr J Carroll, the tribunal held that Nigel Lapthorne’s unfair dismissal claim against Entserve UK Ltd succeeded. It dismissed his direct age discrimination claim, his indirect age discrimination claim, and his breach of contract claim.
On remedy, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £0 because the claimant had received a redundancy payment. It assessed compensation for loss of earnings from 30 September 2020 to 14 February 2022 at a Level 7 salary of £7,618 per month, totalling £125,697, and pension loss over the same period at £12,375. It also awarded £3,957 for the Quarter 2 bonus and loss of statutory rights.
The tribunal recorded a total compensatory award before deductions of £142,029.44. It deducted £64,661.38, being the amount received in the claimant’s final payslip, leaving £77,368.06. When that figure was grossed up to £96,710.08, it exceeded the statutory cap applicable at the date of claim, so the award was capped at £88,519 and was stated to be subject to tax.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the unfair dismissal claim was well-founded and succeeded. The remedy was capped at the statutory cap applicable at the date of claim. | Upheld | — | £88,519 |
| Age discrimination | Direct age discrimination claim; the tribunal found it was not well-founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Age discrimination | Indirect age discrimination claim; the tribunal found it was not well-founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £88,519
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £0
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £88,519
- 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.