Case 3303972/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Carr, Solicitor For the v Miss G Duffy , Consultant — 2019
- Case reference
- 3303972/2018
- Decision date
- 22 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lang Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Carr, Solicitor For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Watford on 21 and 22 November 2019, Employment Judge Lang recorded the tribunal's orders in favour of the claimant on unfair dismissal. The respondent was ordered to pay £39,470.10 in total for that complaint, consisting of a basic award of £1,996 and a compensatory award of £37,514.10.
The tribunal also ordered the respondent to pay £1,923.08 gross for unpaid wages and £1,057.69 gross for holiday pay. The breach of contract claim was dismissed on withdrawal. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and therefore were not set out in writing in this record.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the breach of contract claim was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Awarded £39,470.10, made up of a basic award of £1,996 and a compensatory award of £37,514.10. | Upheld | — | £39,470 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded £1,923.08 gross in relation to unpaid wages. | Upheld | — | £1,923 |
| Holiday pay | Awarded £1,057.69 gross in relation to holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £1,058 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £42,451
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,996
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £37,514
- 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.