Case 2402587/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Ackroyd v Loyalfirm Limited trading as Saxon Paper (in creditors’ voluntary liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 2402587/2023
- Decision date
- 1 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten
- Panel members
- T D Wilson, Dr B Tirohl
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Ackroyd
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Mrs Ackroyd's complaints of unfair dismissal were well founded. It found that she had been constructively unfairly dismissed and also unfairly dismissed for making a protected disclosure. The respondent did not attend the hearing. The tribunal increased the compensatory award by 25% because the respondent had unreasonably failed to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015, applying s 207A of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
For unfair dismissal, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £1,713.00 and a compensatory award of £17,815.20, making a total unfair dismissal award of £19,528.20. It applied the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996, recorded a prescribed element of £11,313.36 for the period 10 December 2022 to 17 June 2024, and stated that the balance was £8,214.84.
The tribunal also found that, when the proceedings began, the respondent was in breach of its duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars. It made an award of £3,612.00 under section 38 Employment Act 2002. The breach of contract claim was also well founded, with damages of £8,294.00, and the unlawful deduction from wages claim succeeded, with £2,212.00 ordered as the gross sum deducted.
The complaint of detriment for making protected disclosures also succeeded. The tribunal awarded £25,000.00 for injury to feelings on that claim. The written monetary orders therefore total £58,646.20.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed and also unfairly dismissed for making a protected disclosure. The unfair dismissal award comprised a basic award and compensatory award. | Upheld | — | £19,528 |
| Other | Award under section 38 Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars; the tribunal assessed the award at four weeks' gross pay. | Upheld | — | £3,612 |
| Breach of contract | Damages for breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £8,294 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal awarded the gross sum deducted; it noted the claimant was responsible for any tax or National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £2,212 |
| Whistleblowing | Complaint of detriment for making protected disclosures; the award was for injury to feelings. | Upheld | — | £25,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £58,646
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,713
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £17,815
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
5 references- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015
- s 207A Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
- Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990
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.