Case 6001564/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Garrick Nisbet v Notus Heavy Lift Solutions Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 6001564/2023
- Decision date
- 14 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Rourke Date
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Garrick Nisbet
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that Mr Garrick Nisbet was unfairly dismissed by Notus Heavy Lift Solutions Limited. Although the unfair dismissal claim succeeded, the tribunal recorded that no compensation was awarded because of the application of the Polkey principle and s.123(6) Employment Rights Act 1996, the latter being cited in relation to contributory conduct.
The claimant’s separate breach of contract claim, brought in respect of notice, was dismissed. No separate monetary award was recorded for that claim. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal unfair but stated that, by application of the Polkey principle and s.123(6) Employment Rights Act 1996 as to contributory conduct, no compensation was awarded. | Upheld | — | £0 |
| Breach of contract | The claim for breach of contract in respect of notice was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £0
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £0
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
2 references- Polkey principle
- s.123(6) Employment Rights Act 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 4 PDF on gov.uk
Published on gov.uk under the .
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.