Case 3313530/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Martin v Ian Williams Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3313530/2022
- Decision date
- 23 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst Representation
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Martin
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr C Martin, brought claims against Ian Williams Ltd. The tribunal sat at Reading on 28 and 29 June 2023 before Employment Judge Shastri-Hurst. The judgment records that the claimant’s claim of constructive unfair dismissal was not well founded and failed.
The tribunal also found that the claimant’s breach of contract claim in relation to notice pay was well founded. It awarded damages of £507.20 gross on that claim, stating that tax deductions had to be made by the respondent and that the claimant would receive the net amount.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal recorded the claim as constructive unfair dismissal and found it was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim was limited to notice pay and succeeded in the sum of £507.20 gross, subject to tax deductions. | Upheld | — | £507 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £507
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.