Case 3307349/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Ms Y Cakir (Purchase Controller) — 2021
- Case reference
- 3307349/2020
- Decision date
- 4 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Smeaton Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was heard at Watford on 4 October 2021 before Employment Judge Smeaton. The claimant, Mrs F Yilmaz, appeared in person and the respondent, Dolphin Movers Limited, was represented by Ms Y Cakir, described as Purchase Controller. The judgment records one liability finding only: the claim for unfair dismissal under section 94(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 succeeded.
On remedy, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay compensation of £13,283.95. That total comprised a basic award of £692.30 and a compensatory award of £12,591.65. No separate award for interest or any other head of loss is recorded in the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claim for unfair dismissal under s.94(1) ERA 1996 succeeded and awarded compensation of £13,283.95, made up of a basic award of £692.30 and a compensatory award of £12,591.65. | Upheld | — | £13,284 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,284
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £692
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £12,592
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.94(1) Employment Rights Act 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.