Case 2500704/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Dennis Mitchell Charlton v DCS Multiserve Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500704/2023
- Decision date
- 27 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heather Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Dennis Mitchell Charlton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard remotely by CVP at Newcastle upon Tyne on 26 June 2023 before Employment Judge Heather. The tribunal recorded that the claimant, Dennis Mitchell Charlton, pursued claims including notice pay, holiday pay, and compensation for failure to provide written employment particulars.
The notice pay claim was found to be well founded and succeeded. The respondent, DCS Multiserve Limited, was ordered to pay the gross sum of £480.80, before any deductions for tax and national insurance as appropriate.
The holiday pay claim was not well founded and was dismissed. Separately, the tribunal found that the respondent had failed to provide a written statement of employment particulars and awarded the claimant 4 weeks' pay as compensation for that failure, quantified at £1,923.20.
The judgment recorded a total amount due to the claimant of £2,404.00. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written record notes that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim succeeded and the respondent was ordered to pay the gross sum of £480.80 before deductions for tax and national insurance as appropriate. | Upheld | — | £481 |
| Holiday pay | The holiday pay claim was not well founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal ordered compensation for failure to provide written statement of employment particulars, assessed at 4 weeks' pay and quantified at £1,923.20. | Upheld | — | £1,923 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,404
- 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.