Case 2214531/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Graham v Openreach Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2214531/2023
- Decision date
- 12 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A.M.S. Green
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Graham
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that the complaint of unfair dismissal was well-founded and that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. It found there was a 0% chance that the claimant would have been fairly dismissed in any event.
The tribunal found that the claimant caused or contributed to the dismissal by blameworthy conduct. It reduced the compensatory award by 10% and also reduced the basic award by 10% because of the claimant's conduct before dismissal.
The respondent was ordered to pay a basic award of £3,414.69, a compensatory award of £12,782.35, and £500 for loss of statutory rights. The judgment states these were the actual sums payable after deductions or uplifts, and that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 did not apply.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the complaint of unfair dismissal was well-founded and that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. The award comprises a basic award, a compensatory award, and loss of statutory rights. | Upheld | — | £16,697 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £16,697
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,415
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £12,782
- 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.