Case 3202313/2012 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Cordwell v Bennett Gould & Partners Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 3202313/2012
- Decision date
- 13 May 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tobin
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Cordwell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting alone before Employment Judge Tobin at the East London Hearing Centre on 7 to 9 May 2019, determined that Mr K Cordwell had been unfairly dismissed in breach of section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment records that full reasons were given at the conclusion of the hearing, but the extracted text only sets out the dispositive findings and remedy.
Compensation was awarded in two parts: a basic award of £645.00 and compensation for loss of earnings and employment-related benefits of £6,420.35. The total award was therefore £7,065.35.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claim for unfair dismissal under section 94 Employment Rights Act 1996. The award was broken down into a basic award of £645.00 and compensation for loss of earnings and employment-related benefits of £6,420.35. | Upheld | — | £7,065 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,065
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £645
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £6,420
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 94 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.