Case 2200453/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Robson, counsel For the v Mr Howson, consultant — 2019
- Case reference
- 2200453/2018
- Decision date
- 14 June 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Segal
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Robson, counsel For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a remitted hearing before Employment Judge Segal sitting alone on 14 November 2019, dealing only with the remaining disputes on compensation, interest and costs after a partially successful appeal. The parties had already agreed the period of loss up to 1 May 2019, and most material facts were agreed, including the claimant’s tax position, her mitigation earnings in Mykonos, and her out-of-pocket mitigation expenditure.
The main compensation issue was how to reflect the admitted difference between London and Mykonos living and wage levels, which was broadly quantified at about 35%. The tribunal preferred the respondent’s broad-brush approach and held that, in order to reach a just and equitable compensatory award, the differential should be taken into account by ignoring the claimant’s out-of-pocket expenses and future tax liability rather than by applying a percentage reduction to the overall award. On that basis the figures were agreed, and the tribunal maintained the unfair dismissal awards of a basic award of £1,956 and a compensatory award of £41,750. It also recorded the wrongful dismissal award of £3,127 net.
On interest, the tribunal held that interest was payable under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, but only on the sums payable by virtue of the original tribunal decision. It rejected the claimant’s argument that interest should run retrospectively on the remitted awards and accepted the respondent’s case that the order did not retrospectively adjust the amount payable. The interest award was £3,705.
The tribunal also made a costs award of £10,000 plus VAT. It accepted that the respondent had unreasonably failed to accept the claimant’s without prejudice save as to costs offer of £29,000 dated 14 June 2019, and that there had been significant non-compliance with the tribunal’s directions for the hearing on 10 September 2019. The respondent’s organisation-level explanation for that non-compliance was noted, but not treated as an excuse.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | Net award of £3,127. | Upheld | — | £3,127 |
| Unfair dismissal | Basic award of £1,956 and compensatory award of £41,750. | Upheld | — | £43,706 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £50,538
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,956
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £41,750
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990
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.