Case 3200312/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M. Headley v London Fire Commissioner — 2022
- Case reference
- 3200312/2019
- Decision date
- 7 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Massarella Members
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
- Panel members
- Mrs B. Saund, Mr T. Burrows
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M. Headley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal issued a reserved judgment on remedy. By consent, in relation to case number 3200312/2019, the Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant total compensation of £9,454.42.
The award comprised a basic award, reduced by 75%, of £3,048, and a compensatory award of £5,824.02. The compensatory award comprised loss of earnings of £4,318.02, accrued annual leave of £502.59, and pension contributions of £1,003.41. The Tribunal also recorded an ACAS uplift of £582.40.
The supplied judgment text does not set out liability findings, reasons for the award, or any findings on race discrimination.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The remedy judgment records a basic award and compensatory award, which indicate an unfair dismissal remedy, and states that the compensation order was made by consent. The liability judgment and any discrimination findings are not set out in the supplied judgment text. | Upheld | — | £9,454 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,454
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,048
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £5,824
- 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.