Case 2602532/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr I Turlington v Future Display and Shopfitting Limited (in voluntary liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 2602532/2020
- Decision date
- 26 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Victoria Butler
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr I Turlington
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 remedy judgment heard by CVP on 25 November 2021 before Employment Judge Victoria Butler sitting alone. The respondent, Future Display and Shopfitting Limited (in voluntary liquidation), did not attend. The judgment records that Mr I Turlington was unfairly dismissed, that the respondent failed to pay his holiday entitlement, and that he was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice.
On remedy, the tribunal ordered 550 for loss of statutory rights on the unfair dismissal claim, 3,120 as the net sum due for holiday entitlement, and 1,040 in damages for notice. The monetary awards recorded in the judgment total 4,710.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and awards 550 for loss of statutory rights. | Upheld | — | £550 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment says the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and orders the net sum of 3120. | Upheld | — | £3,120 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment finds dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice and awards damages of 1040. | Upheld | — | £1,040 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,710
- 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.