Case 3319932/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Williamson v Ambivent Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3319932/2019
- Decision date
- 8 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ord Members
- Venue
- Cambridge
- Panel members
- Ms J Costley, Mr A Schooler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Williamson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting remotely in Cambridge before Employment Judge Ord with Ms J Costley and Mr A Schooler, found that the respondent failed to consider the claimant’s flexible working request in a reasonable manner contrary to s.80G(1)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal’s reason was that the respondent did not follow its own procedure and did not hold an appeal meeting after rejecting the claimant’s request.
For that failure, the tribunal awarded compensation of two weeks’ pay at the statutory maximum weeks’ pay, totalling £1,050.
The tribunal recorded that the remainder of the claimant’s complaints were not well founded and were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flexible working | The tribunal found the respondent failed to consider the claimant’s flexible working request in a reasonable manner contrary to s.80G(1)(a) ERA 1996 because it did not follow its own procedure and did not hold an appeal meeting after rejecting the request. Compensation was assessed at two weeks’ pay at the statutory maximum weeks’ pay, totalling £1,050. | Upheld | — | £1,050 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the remainder of the claimant’s complaints were not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Parental leave | The judgment states that the remainder of the claimant’s complaints were not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states that the remainder of the claimant’s complaints were not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Sexual orientation discrimination | The judgment states that the remainder of the claimant’s complaints were not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Sexual orientation | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the remainder of the claimant’s complaints were not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,050
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,050
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.80G(1)(a) 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.