Case 2207418/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Sakaria v AVT Systems (UK) Limited (in liquidation) Heard via Cloud Video Platform (London Central) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2207418/2021
- Decision date
- 20 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davidson Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Sakaria
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Davidson heard the claim remotely by Cloud Video Platform on 20 March 2023. The respondent did not attend. In the written judgment record, the tribunal found that Mr D Sakaria was unfairly and wrongfully dismissed.
The award recorded in the judgment was split between an unfair dismissal compensatory award of £16,320.00 and notice pay of £2,868.40, giving a total award of £19,188.40. The judgment note states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of sending the written record of the decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written record states that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and awards an unfair dismissal compensatory award of £16,320.00. | Upheld | — | £16,320 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The written record states that the claimant was wrongfully dismissed and awards notice pay of £2,868.40. | Upheld | — | £2,868 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £19,188
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £16,320
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.