Case 3205514/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs E Whymark v CHC Accountancy Ltd t/a Clemence Hoar Cummings — 2023
- Case reference
- 3205514/2022
- Decision date
- 29 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Volkmer Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs E Whymark
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 15, 16 and 17 November 2023 before Employment Judge Volkmer, the tribunal dismissed the holiday pay complaint, upheld the breach of contract complaint in relation to notice pay, and upheld the unfair dismissal complaint. The written record states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that the decision was then recorded in summary form.
On notice pay, the tribunal held that the breach of contract claim was well-founded and awarded £2,287.02 in damages. The figure was calculated using gross weekly pay of £381.17 over the six-week notice period ending on 29 December 2022, and the tribunal noted that gross pay was used because of the likelihood that the payment would be subject to tax as post-employment notice pay.
On unfair dismissal, the tribunal made a basic award of £3,430.53 and a compensatory award of £1,371.03. The schedule shows the basic award calculated by reference to 1.5 times six years' service at gross weekly pay, and the compensatory award based on 12 weeks at weekly statutory sick pay of £99.35. The respondent's unreasonable failure to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015 led to a 15% uplift under s 207A TULR(C)A 1992. The schedule records the total award as £7,088.58 and states that these are the actual sums payable after deductions or uplifts were applied.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The complaint in respect of holiday pay was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay was well-founded. Damages were assessed at £2,287.02 using gross pay for the six-week notice period, to reflect the likelihood that post-employment notice pay would be taxable. | Upheld | — | £2,287 |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal unfair and awarded a basic award of £3,430.53 plus a compensatory award of £1,371.03. The compensatory award included a 15% uplift under s 207A TULR(C)A 1992 for unreasonable failure to comply with the ACAS Code; the schedule records these as the actual sums payable after deductions or uplifts. | Upheld | — | £4,802 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,089
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,431
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £1,371
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
2 references- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015
- s 207A Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
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.