Case 3301843/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Magee, Counsel For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 3301843/2020
- Decision date
- 19 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Members
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
- Panel members
- Mrs S Allen, Mr C Davie
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr M Magee, Counsel For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a remedy judgment following an earlier Judgment and Reasons sent to the parties on 2 August 2022. The tribunal ordered Genesis Technology Services Limited to pay Mr N Satpal a total of £122,654.26. The written remedy judgment records awards under headings for unfair dismissal, notice pay, and injury to feelings, while noting that reasons had been given orally.
For unfair dismissal, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £5,512.50, calculated as 7 weeks multiplied by 1.5 and £525. The compensatory award calculation used 70 weeks of loss from 28 November 2019 to 31 March 2021 at £1,965.23 net, deducted 7 weeks' notice pay and earnings from the claimant's own business, added a 25% uplift under TULRCA and £500 for loss of statutory rights, and then applied the statutory cap in force at the date of issue, reducing that element to £86,444.00.
The tribunal also awarded notice pay of £13,756.61, calculated as 7 weeks at £1,965.23 net, plus a 25% TULRCA uplift of £3,439.15, giving £17,195.76. It awarded £10,000 for injury to feelings and £3,502 interest at 8% from 3 September 2019 for 1,598 days. These figures, together with the unfair dismissal basic and capped compensatory awards, produced the total award payable of £122,654.26.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The remedy judgment expressly records an unfair dismissal award comprising a basic award of £5,512.50 and a capped compensatory award of £86,444.00. | Upheld | — | £91,957 |
| Breach of contract | The remedy judgment records a notice pay award of £13,756.61 plus a 25% TULRCA uplift of £3,439.15. It does not set out written liability reasons. | Upheld | — | £17,196 |
| Whistleblowing | Classified as whistleblowing because the case context lists Public Interest Disclosure and the remedy judgment records injury to feelings and interest, but the remedy judgment itself does not set out written liability reasons for this head of award. | Upheld | — | £13,502 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £122,654
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £5,513
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £86,444
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
2 references- 25% uplift under TULRCA
- statutory cap in force at date of issue
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.