Case 3200609/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Daniel Seward v Auto Enterprises Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 3200609/2019
- Decision date
- 26 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Peter Wilkinson
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Daniel Seward
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 25 March 2021 before Employment Judge Peter Wilkinson, the tribunal determined that Daniel Seward's claim for unfair constructive dismissal under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well founded. The judgment states that he was unfairly dismissed, and the claim was upheld.
The tribunal also upheld the claimant's breach of contract claim, finding that Auto Enterprises Ltd breached his contract as claimed. The extracted judgment does not record any separate remedy figures, and no monetary award is stated in the text supplied.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes this as a claim for 'unfair constructive dismissal' brought under Part X of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and states that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found that the respondent breached the claimant's contract 'as claimed', but the extracted text does not record a separate monetary figure for this claim. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.