Case 3300064/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Daniel Dimmock v The Boiler Brigade Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3300064/2021
- Decision date
- 2 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S. Evans Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Daniel Dimmock
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Watford on 28 October 2022, Employment Judge S. Evans heard the case, with the claimant represented by a friend and no attendance for the respondent. The tribunal held that the claims for wrongful dismissal, breach of contract, and entitlement to pay for accrued and untaken annual leave were well-founded and succeeded.
The written decision ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £4,309.56 in total. That sum was made up of £2,570 net for 4 weeks' contractual notice pay, £1,230.76 gross for 8 days' accrued and untaken annual leave, and £508.80 for unpaid pension contributions. The unlawful deduction of wages claim was dismissed upon withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment orders 4 weeks' contractual notice pay of £2,570 net; the written record does not expressly allocate the sum to the claim, but it is the notice-pay head in the award. | Upheld | — | £2,570 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment includes unpaid pension contributions of £508.80 as a remedy head; the written record does not expressly allocate the sum to the claim, but this is treated as the breach of contract award. | Upheld | — | £509 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment awards £1,230.76 gross for 8 days' accrued and untaken annual leave; the written record does not expressly allocate the sum to the claim, but this is the annual leave head in the award. | Upheld | — | £1,231 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records that this claim was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,310
- 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.