Case 2501743/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Hunnam v Barclays Roofing Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2501743/2021
- Decision date
- 8 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Morris
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Hunnam
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the claimant’s complaint under s.111 ERA 1996 was well-founded because he had terminated his contract in circumstances falling within s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996, and his dismissal was unfair contrary to ss.94 and 98 ERA 1996. The judgment records the dismissal as constructive in nature, because the claimant ended the contract by reason of the respondent’s conduct and was entitled to do so without notice.
In respect of remedy, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £10,530.14. That sum was made up of a basic award of £7,848.75 and a compensatory award of £2,681.39. The claimant stated that he had received neither jobseeker’s allowance nor any other relevant benefit during his unemployment, so the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 did not apply to the compensatory award.
The separate wages complaint under s.23 ERA 1996 did not proceed. The judgment records that the respondent had refunded the unauthorised deduction before the hearing, the claimant withdrew that complaint, and it was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal accepted the claimant’s complaint under s.111 ERA 1996 that he had terminated the contract under s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996 in circumstances entitling him to do so without notice, and found the dismissal unfair under ss.94 and 98 ERA 1996. Compensation of £10,530.14 was awarded, comprising a basic award of £7,848.75 and a compensatory award of £2,681.39. | Upheld | — | £10,530 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Before the hearing the respondent refunded the deduction. The claimant then withdrew the s.23 ERA 1996 complaint, and the tribunal recorded it as withdrawn and dismissed. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,530
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £7,849
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £2,681
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.111 ERA 1996
- s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996
- s.94 ERA 1996
- s.98 ERA 1996
- s.23 ERA 1996
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996
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.