Case 2601984/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr B A Hirst v Soundgas Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2601984/2023
- Decision date
- 10 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brewer Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr B A Hirst
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr B A Hirst, brought a claim of unfair dismissal against Soundgas Limited. The hearing took place on 25 March 2024 at Midlands East (by CVP) before Employment Judge Brewer, sitting alone. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent did not attend.
The Tribunal found that the claim for unfair dismissal succeeded. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant a basic award of £3,216, calculated as 4 x 1.5 x £536.00, together with compensation in the sum of £11,970.00.
Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and written reasons will not be provided unless requested within 14 days. The judgment was sent to the parties on 10 April 2024.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Award comprises a basic award of £3,216 and compensation of £11,970. The judgment does not separately label the £11,970 as a compensatory award, but it is the only compensation figure attached to the unfair dismissal claim. | Upheld | — | £15,186 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £15,186
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,216
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £11,970
- compensatory remedy recorded
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.