Case 2602884/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Walker v Rayden Engineering Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2602884/2020
- Decision date
- 17 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Legard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Walker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case remotely by Cloud Video Platform in the Midlands (East) Region on 12 and 13 May 2021 before Employment Judge Legard sitting alone. It dismissed the claimant's claim of automatic unfair dismissal pursuant to s.99 ERA and also dismissed the claim for compensation pursuant to section 57A/B relating to time off for dependants.
The claim of wrongful dismissal succeeded. The tribunal awarded Mr J Walker £455.66.
The written record states that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested, so this record contains the outcome and award only.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Automatic unfair dismissal pursuant to s.99 ERA; the tribunal found the claim was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Claim for compensation pursuant to section 57A/B relating to time off for dependants; the tribunal found it was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The wrongful dismissal claim succeeded and the tribunal awarded £455.66. | Upheld | — | £456 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £456
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.