Case 2300693/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B Howe v Abaya Clubs Ltd Heard by Cloud video — 2021
- Case reference
- 2300693/2019
- Decision date
- 18 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Reed Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B Howe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 18 February 2021, Employment Judge Reed found that Mr B Howe had been unfairly dismissed by Abaya Clubs Ltd. The tribunal made no order for reinstatement or re-engagement. It awarded a basic award of £5,588 and a compensatory award of £37,213.30, and stated that the recoupment regulations did not apply to the compensatory award.
The tribunal also found that the respondent breached the contract of employment by failing to give notice of dismissal, and awarded £7,805.16 in damages. It further held that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages in respect of salary and directed payment of £8,294.92.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal awarded a basic award of £5,588 and a compensatory award of £37,213.30. | Upheld | — | £42,801 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the respondent breached the contract by failing to give notice of dismissal. | Upheld | — | £7,805 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of salary. | Upheld | — | £8,295 |
| Holiday pay | Unauthorised deductions from wages representing holiday accrued and untaken. | Upheld | — | £18,223 |
| Other | The respondent failed to provide a statement of principal terms of employment. | Upheld | — | £1,016 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £78,140
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £5,588
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £37,213
- 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.