Case 3303882/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Kenneth David Topham v Airways Aviation Academy Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3303882/2020
- Decision date
- 18 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mr. M.
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Kenneth David Topham
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Kenneth David Topham’s claim of unfair dismissal was well-founded and therefore succeeded. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing; it does not set out the underlying findings in detail, but it does record the tribunal’s dispositive conclusion on liability.
The tribunal also found that the claimant caused or contributed to his dismissal. On that basis, it reduced both the basic award and the compensatory award by 80%.
After applying that reduction, the respondent was ordered to pay a basic award of £398.70 and a compensatory award made up of a prescribed element of £3,500.83 and a non-prescribed element of £293.57, producing a total award of £4,193.10.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the unfair dismissal claim well-founded. It also found that the claimant caused or contributed to his dismissal, so the basic and compensatory awards were reduced by 80%. | Upheld | — | £4,193 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,193
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £399
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £3,794
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.