Case 2600322/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Coker v Hartland Pies Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2600322/2020
- Decision date
- 23 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Clark
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Coker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in favour of Mr C Coker against Hartland Pies Limited. The tribunal recorded that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £1,440. It also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £1,801.
The tribunal further found that Mr C Coker was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £3,080. It also held that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,080. The hearing listed for 29 May 2020 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,440 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states the dismissal was in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £1,801 |
| Redundancy | The judgment states the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £3,080 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £1,080 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,401
- 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.