Case 2207236/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 2207236/2020
- Decision date
- 23 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Glennie
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was given under Rule 21. The Tribunal recorded that the complaints of unfair dismissal under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996, breach of contract, and unlawful deduction from wages were well founded.
The claim for compensation for unfair dismissal was withdrawn and dismissed on withdrawal. Compensation for breach of contract was assessed at £25,000 net of tax, and compensation for unlawful deduction from wages was assessed at £16,610.58 gross, made up of unpaid salary and unpaid holiday pay.
The total sum payable by the Respondent to the Claimant was £41,610.58. Written reasons were not provided in the judgment, with oral reasons having been given at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the unfair dismissal complaint under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well founded, but the claim for compensation for unfair dismissal was withdrawn and dismissed on withdrawal. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Compensation assessed at £25,000.00 net of tax. | Upheld | — | £25,000 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Compensation assessed at £16,610.58 gross, comprising £8,736.56 for non-payment of salary and £7,874.02 for non-payment of holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £16,611 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £41,611
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure
- section 103A of the 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.