Case 3200518/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Cooper v G4S Secure Solutions (UK) Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3200518/2022
- Decision date
- 12 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Members
- Panel members
- Ms T Jansen, Mr M Wood
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Cooper
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that, by consent, the respondent must pay the claimant £551.73 in respect of his holiday pay and any unlawful deduction of wages claim. The judgment does not apportion that amount between holiday pay and unlawful deduction of wages.
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's claim of automatically unfair dismissal. The judgment gives no further reasons or legal analysis in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The judgment says by consent the respondent must pay the claimant £551.73 in respect of holiday pay and any unlawful deduction of wages claim; it does not split the sum between those heads. | Settled | — | £552 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment says by consent the respondent must pay the claimant £551.73 in respect of holiday pay and any unlawful deduction of wages claim; it does not split the sum between those heads. | Settled | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The judgment describes this as a claim of automatically unfair dismissal and the listing category indicates public interest disclosure; classified as whistleblowing with reduced confidence because the judgment text itself does not spell out the protected disclosure basis. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £552
- 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.