Case 2300120/2021 · Employment Tribunal
I Adebisi v Danny Sullivan and Sons Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2300120/2021
- Decision date
- 9 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Burge Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
I Adebisi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case by video at London South Employment Tribunal on 2 and 9 November 2021 before Employment Judge L Burge. It recorded that the correct name of the respondent was Danny Sullivan and Sons Ltd. The claimant’s application to amend his claim to include unpaid holiday pay and furlough pay was refused.
The unfair dismissal claim succeeded. The tribunal also rejected the wrongful dismissal claim, describing it as not well founded and dismissing it. No discrimination or other statutory claim was recorded in the judgment.
On remedy, the tribunal held that it was just and equitable to limit the claimant’s losses to one month, being the date by which he would have been fairly dismissed had a fair procedure been followed, applying Polkey. It added a 10% uplift to the compensatory award for failure to follow the ACAS Code and reduced both the basic and compensatory awards by 50% for contributory fault.
The claimant was awarded £3,710.40 in total, made up of a basic award of £2,017.50 and a compensatory award of £1,692.90.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim succeeded; tribunal awarded total compensation of £3,710.40, made up of a basic award of £2,017.50 and a compensatory award of £1,692.90. | Upheld | — | £3,710 |
| Wrongful dismissal | Claim was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,710
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,018
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £1,693
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
3 references- Polkey
- ACAS Code
- contributory fault
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.