Case 3312504/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K. Randall v The Black Apollo Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 3312504/2023
- Decision date
- 23 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G. King Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs K. Randall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Watford Employment Tribunal hearing on 5 July 2024, before Employment Judge G. King, the tribunal held that Mrs K. Randall’s unfair dismissal claim was well founded and succeeded. The tribunal awarded a basic award of £2,638.22, a compensatory award of £713.28, and £500.00 in respect of loss of statutory rights.
The tribunal also held that the claimant’s claim in relation to unpaid holiday was well founded and succeeded. It awarded £909.78 in respect of unpaid holiday, with that payment subject to deductions for tax and National Insurance. The total amount awarded was £4,761.28, of which £909.78 was subject to deductions for tax and National Insurance.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the unfair dismissal claim well founded and awarded a basic award of £2,638.22, a compensatory award of £713.28, and £500.00 in respect of loss of statutory rights. | Upheld | — | £3,852 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the unpaid holiday claim well founded and awarded £909.78, subject to deductions for tax and National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £910 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,761
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,638
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £713
- 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.