Case 2303474/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Tyler v Mr Vik Patel, partner, in the firm of SVA Car Lamps & Body Panels — 2021
- Case reference
- 2303474/2020
- Decision date
- 30 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Rourke Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Tyler
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the London South video hearing on 28 July 2021 before Employment Judge C H O’Rourke, the Claimant’s claims of constructive unfair dismissal, unlawful deductions from wages, arrears of holiday pay, and failure to pay pay in lieu of notice were all dismissed. The written record records the disposals and notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing.
The Respondent’s counterclaim succeeded. The tribunal recorded that the Claimant had been in breach of contract and ordered him to pay the Respondent £6,300.
Claims and outcomes
5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Claimant’s claim of constructive unfair dismissal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claimant’s claim for unlawful deductions from wages. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claimant’s claim for arrears of holiday pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claimant’s claim for failure to pay pay in lieu of notice. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Respondent’s counterclaim succeeded; the tribunal recorded that the Claimant had been in breach of contract and ordered him to pay £6,300. | Upheld | — | £6,300 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,300
- across all upheld claims
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.