Case 4101879/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Louden v ACL Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 4101879/2020
- Decision date
- 2 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Cowen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Louden
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mr J Louden had been dismissed by ACL Ltd on 25 February 2020 and that the respondent had failed to respond to the claim or attend the hearing. On the material presented under rule 21, the tribunal issued judgment for the claimant in respect of unfair dismissal. It recorded that the claimant had been given no reason for dismissal and that no apparent procedure had been followed.
For remedy, the tribunal accepted the claimant's sworn evidence on loss. It recorded that he had earned £465 per week and had not found alternative employment since dismissal, with the Covid-19 lockdown affecting his ability to pursue other work. The tribunal awarded a basic award of £1,627.50, past loss of earnings of £8,370, loss of statutory rights of £350, and future loss of earnings of £4,185, producing a total award of £14,532.50.
The tribunal made no award for anxiety and stress because that is not an award within its jurisdiction. It also noted that no application was made for loss of notice pay.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Judgment entered under rule 21 after the respondent failed to respond or appear. The tribunal awarded compensation for basic award, past loss of earnings, loss of statutory rights and future loss of earnings. | Upheld | — | £14,533 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,533
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,628
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £12,905
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 21
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.