Case 2302009/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Blackwood v Draughts Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2302009/2022
- Decision date
- 18 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robinson Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Blackwood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal held that Mr Blackwood was unfairly dismissed by Draughts Limited. It also found that he contributed to his dismissal to the extent of 25%, and directed that that reduction should be applied to both the basic award and the compensatory award for unfair dismissal.
No remedy figure was fixed at the liability hearing. The Tribunal listed a further remedy hearing for 18 January 2023, and stated that this would include consideration of whether any adjustment should be made under s.207A(2) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 for any failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedure.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal found the Claimant was unfairly dismissed and found contributory fault of 25%, to be applied to the basic and compensatory award. Remedy was reserved to a further hearing on 18 January 2023, including whether any adjustment should be made under s.207A(2) TULR(C)A 1992 for failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedure. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.207A(2) TULR(C)A 1992
- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedure
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.