Case 3300487/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Pol Brand Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3300487/2023
- Decision date
- 4 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Ord Appearances
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not attend and was not represented. The tribunal found that the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed for asserting his statutory right to a written statement of the terms and conditions of his employment.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had not been paid for four days of accrued but untaken holiday pay at the time of dismissal. It awarded a basic award of £500 and a compensatory award comprising loss of earnings, unpaid pension contributions and unpaid holiday pay.
The total judgment sum awarded to the claimant was £5,817.20. The recoupment provisions did not apply.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed for asserting his statutory right to a written statement of employment terms. Remedy amount here treats the basic award, loss of earnings and unpaid pension contributions as attached to the dismissal claim, excluding the separately identified holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £5,456 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant was not paid for four days accrued but untaken holiday pay at dismissal. The holiday pay was listed within the compensatory award. | Upheld | — | £361 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,817
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £500
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £5,317
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.