Case 2302403/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Neckles (Union Representative) For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 2302403/2017
- Decision date
- 11 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hyams-Parish Members
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Ms L Brooks, Ms N Beeston
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr J Neckles (Union Representative) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at London South on 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 November 2020 before Employment Judge Hyams-Parish, with Ms L Brooks and Ms N Beeston as the lay members. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and are not set out in the record. The tribunal held that the claim for breaching the statutory right to be accompanied under s.10 ERelA was well founded and awarded the Claimant £250 compensation.
All of the remaining claims were dismissed. The claim of unfair dismissal under s.98 ERA failed, as did the wrongful dismissal claim. The tribunal also dismissed the claim of automatic unfair dismissal and the separate detriment complaint said to arise from the Claimant asserting his right to be accompanied under s.12 ERelA.
The claim of automatic unfair dismissal based on the assertion of a relevant statutory right under s.104 ERA was dismissed. The victimisation claim under s.27 EQA was also dismissed. The written record does not provide any further reasoning or any additional monetary award beyond the £250 paid on the successful right-to-be-accompanied claim.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Breaches the statutory right to be accompanied under s.10 ERelA; the tribunal awarded £250 compensation. | Upheld | — | £250 |
| Unfair dismissal | Ordinary unfair dismissal claim under s.98 ERA. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Wrongful dismissal claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Automatic unfair dismissal claim said to arise because the Claimant asserted his statutory right to be accompanied under s.12 ERelA. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Separate detriment complaint said to arise because the Claimant asserted his statutory right to be accompanied under s.12 ERelA. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Automatic unfair dismissal claim under s.104 ERA. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation claim under s.27 EQA; the written record does not identify the protected characteristic. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £250
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £250
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
5 references- s.10 ERelA
- s.98 ERA
- s.12 ERelA
- s.104 ERA
- s.27 EQA
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.