Case 3303804/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Mr Gidney, Counsel For the v Mr Joshi, Solicitor — 2018

Case reference: 3303804/2019
Decision date: 5 November 2018
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Postle Appearances
Venue: Norwich

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr Gidney, Counsel For the

Respondent

Mr Joshi, Solicitor

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal recorded that Mr J Pardon was unfairly dismissed on 5 November 2018. It noted that, by consent, the parties agreed compensation of £25,000 in respect of that unfair dismissal. The judgment does not provide a split between basic and compensatory awards, and it does not set out written reasons because reasons were given orally at the hearing.

The tribunal also recorded that the respondent conceded holiday pay was due for 14 days and ordered payment of £1,555.23. In addition, it found an unlawful deduction from wages in the sum of £333.26 and ordered payment of that amount. The judgment is a short disposal decision and does not contain further findings on liability beyond those recorded claims and sums.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal recorded that the claimant was unfairly dismissed on 5 November 2018 and that the parties had agreed by consent that compensation would be paid in the sum of £25,000. The judgment does not split that figure into basic and compensatory awards.	Upheld	—	£25,000
Holiday pay	The respondent conceded that holiday pay was due for 14 days, and the tribunal ordered payment of £1,555.23.	Upheld	—	£1,555
Unlawful deduction from wages	The tribunal found an unlawful deduction from wages in the sum of £333.26 and ordered payment of that amount.	Upheld	—	£333

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £26,888; across all upheld claims

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.