Case 2204365/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Wilkinson 1st v Areaworks Group Limited (in voluntary liquidation). 2nd Respondent: Mr L Ramsden 3rd Respondent: Mr P Lawrence London Central: in person on 9-13 October 2023 — 2023
- Case reference
- 2204365/2021
- Decision date
- 24 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nicolle Non-legal
- Panel members
- Mr M Ferry, Ms L Jones
Parties
2 namedKey findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal upheld Mr Wilkinson's ordinary unfair dismissal claim under s.98 ERA 1996 against R1, but dismissed the automatically unfair dismissal claims under ss.103A and 104 ERA 1996. It also upheld the wrongful dismissal claim. On remedy, the tribunal found that had a fair procedure been followed Mr Wilkinson would have remained employed for the first two months after dismissal, and that thereafter there was an 80% chance he would have been fairly dismissed for redundancy. The compensatory award was therefore limited on a Polkey basis after 14 July 2021, then increased by 25% because R1 had materially breached the ACAS Code of Conduct.
The tribunal found that disclosure 4 on the claimant's list of issues was a qualifying protected disclosure, and that detriments 5, 6, 7, 9 and 11 succeeded. The discrimination claims, namely direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, harassment and victimisation under the Equality Act 2010, all failed and were dismissed. For the detriments, the tribunal awarded £15,000 for injury to feelings and £5,000 for aggravated damages, then applied a 25% ACAS uplift to reach £25,000, which it recorded as the joint and several liability of R1 and R3. The tribunal said that award related to pre-dismissal detriments and was not subject to grossing up.
The tribunal also upheld the claim for failure to pay a contractual bonus and unpaid wages under s.23 ERA 1996, alternatively described as breach of contract. It awarded £5,712.62 for the bonus and unpaid wages, and interest of £2,585.09 on the wrongful dismissal award plus £1,086.81 on the bonus and wage award, giving total interest of £3,671.90. The tribunal awarded a basic award of £2,448 and a compensatory award of £12,495.86 for unfair dismissal, and £10,874.11 for wrongful dismissal. After avoiding double recovery between the unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal awards, it recorded R1's liability at £25,412.41 and R1 and R3's joint and several liability at £25,000.
Claims and outcomes
9 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Ordinary unfair dismissal under s.98 ERA 1996; upheld against R1. | Upheld | — | £14,944 |
| Unfair dismissal | Automatically unfair dismissal claims under ss.103A and 104 ERA 1996 failed and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Wrongful dismissal upheld; award reflected the claimant's net loss for the 13-week notice period. | Upheld | — | £10,874 |
| Whistleblowing | Succeeded in part: disclosure 4 on the claimant's list of issues was found to be a qualifying protected disclosure, and detriments 5, 6, 7, 9 and 11 succeeded. Liability was joint and several as between R1 and R3. | Other | — | £25,000 |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Direct discrimination under s.13 Equality Act 2010 failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Indirect discrimination under s.19 Equality Act 2010 failed and was dismissed. | Dismissed |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £50,412
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,448
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £12,496
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
10 references- s.98 ERA 1996
- s.103A ERA 1996
- s.104 ERA 1996
- Polkey
- ACAS Code of Conduct
- s.13 Equality Act 2010
- s.19 Equality Act 2010
- s.26 Equality Act 2010
- s.27 Equality Act 2010
- s.23 ERA 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.