Case 2410456/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Makin v Masterpalm Properties — 2019
- Case reference
- 2410456/2019
- Decision date
- 11 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Warren
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Makin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningJudge Warren held that Mrs J Makin was unfairly dismissed by Masterpalm Properties and that her dismissal was also in breach of contract. The effective date of termination was 7 May 2019. The claimant was 54 years old at that date and had 9 complete years' service.
For the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal calculated a basic award under ERA 1996 s.119 of £2,639.25. It calculated a compensatory award before adjustment of £4,448.28, based on loss of earnings from 3 July 2019 to 25 November 2019, pension contributions of £45.75 and loss of statutory protection of £350, less earnings from new employment and cleaning work. The tribunal then applied a 15% uplift because of procedural failings, including failure to notify the claimant of the allegation, failure to invite her to an investigation meeting, refusal to hold the disciplinary hearing on a date suitable to her union representative, a disciplinary hearing lasting just over 3 minutes, and failure to provide the evidence in advance of the disciplinary and appeal hearings.
Schedule A records the compensatory award as £4,514.65 after the uplift and the total award for unfair dismissal as £7,153.90 on the arithmetic in Schedule A, although paragraph 4 states £7,154.90. The recoupment annex records a total monetary award of £9,104.77, a prescribed element of £4,052.53 for the period 3 July 2019 to 25 November 2019, and a balance of £5,052.24. On the breach of contract claim, the tribunal awarded £1,950.87, being 9 weeks' net pay of £188.49 per week increased by 15%.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Schedule A calculates a basic award of £2,639.25 and an adjusted compensatory award of £4,514.65, which totals £7,153.90. Paragraph 4 states £7,154.90, so the judgment contains a £1 discrepancy; the recoupment annex and component figures support £7,153.90. | Upheld | — | £7,154 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held the dismissal was in breach of contract and awarded 9 weeks' net pay of £188.49 per week, increased by 15%. | Upheld | — | £1,951 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,105
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,639
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £4,515
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.119 ERA 1996
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996
- 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.