Case 3305593/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Samantha Davis v Alliance Disposables Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3305593/2023
- Decision date
- 18 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cotton Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Samantha Davis
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Samantha Davis’s claim that she was unfairly dismissed by Alliance Disposables Ltd contrary to section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 succeeded. The judgment records that the hearing took place at Reading by CVP on 12 December 2023 before Employment Judge Cotton. No separate findings on liability reasoning are set out in the written record because reasons were given orally at the hearing.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay a basic award of £3,850. The judgment states that this was a gross figure calculated in accordance with section 119 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. No compensatory award, interest, or other monetary element is recorded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed contrary to section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The only monetary award recorded in the judgment was a gross basic award of £3,850, calculated under section 119. | Upheld | — | £3,850 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,850
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,850
- statutory, unfair dismissal
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.94 ERA 1996
- s.119 ERA 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.