Case 4111707/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Little v Specific Hospitality Training Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 4111707/2021
- Decision date
- 22 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge F Eccles
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Little
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in which no response had been presented. Employment Judge F Eccles stated that there was sufficient material to determine the claim and found that Mr W Little was unfairly dismissed by Specific Hospitality Training Limited.
The tribunal awarded a basic award of £5,922, calculated as £329 x 18 weeks. It also awarded a compensatory award of £14,109.36, made up of £9,878.08, £3,731.28 and £500. In addition, the tribunal ordered notice pay of £3,948, calculated as £329 x 12 weeks.
The judgment states that the Recoupment Provisions apply to the compensatory award. The protected period was 7 June 2021 to 1 April 2022. The prescribed element was £9,878.08 and the balance was £4,231.28. The judgment recorded the total monetary award as £14,109.36.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed and awarded a basic award, a compensatory award, and separate notice pay. Recoupment provisions were stated to apply to the compensatory award. | Upheld | — | £14,109 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £14,109
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £5,922
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £14,109
- 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.