Case 3220395/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Gill v Gill Bailey Tavern Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3220395/2020
- Decision date
- 5 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moor Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Gill
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Mr C Gill’s complaint of unfair dismissal was well-founded and succeeded against Gill Bailey Tavern Limited. The judgment records an effective date of termination of 6 October 2020, Mr Gill’s age as 50, five complete years of service, net weekly pay of £480 and gross weekly pay of £632 for the purposes of the award calculation.
Annex 1 set the basic award at £2,152 after applying a 20% reduction for contributory fault to an initial figure of £2,690. The compensatory element was calculated by reference to past net loss of earnings of £5,660.80, after deducting £8,000 received in November 2020 and applying a 40% Polkey reduction from 24 April 2020, together with ACAS uplifts of £1,515.20 on past loss and £112.25 on future loss, future loss of earnings of £449, and £500 for loss of statutory rights.
The total monetary award was £10,389.25. The tribunal noted that this corrected an arithmetical slip because the judgment had previously stated the total as £10,289.25. Annex 2 states that recoupment applies, with a prescribed element of £7,076.00 relating to 7 October 2020 to 22 June 2021, and that the balance of £3,213.25 is payable immediately.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written award schedules an apparent date inconsistency in Annex 1, but the monetary calculations and total award are internally consistent. | Upheld | — | £10,389 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,389
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,152
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £8,237
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Polkey reduction
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.