Case 6010549/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Andrew Palmer v Aqua Lane Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 6010549/2024
- Decision date
- 9 January 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Liz Ord
- Venue
- Croydon
Parties
2 namedAndrew Palmer
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Liz Ord ordered the respondent Aqua Lane Limited to pay the claimant a total of £122,425.70 following a hearing in the respondent's absence. The award comprises a basic award of £9,800 calculated on 12 full years' service and age 45 at the termination date of 18 April 2024. The compensatory award totalled £75,982.63 (grossed-up at 40% on amounts above the £30,000 tax threshold) and included immediate lost earnings of £99,000.83 over 644 days at a net daily rate of £153.73, future loss of earnings of £1,795.51 to 4 August 2026, accommodation losses of £6,302.40 over eight months arising from eviction from a tied pub flat, travel expenses of £1,300, and £500 for loss of statutory rights, less mitigation earnings of £55,229.15. An award for injury to feelings of £32,000 was made in the upper end of the middle Vento band, with interest of £4,643.07 at 8% from the date of suspension on 18 March 2024. The Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 do not apply. The judgment text supplied does not state explicitly the legal cause of action giving rise to the injury to feelings award; that classification has been recorded in claims with reduced confidence and a note flagging the uncertainty.
Claims and outcomes
4 claims adjudicated| Claim type | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Upheld | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 referenceRemedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £122,426
- Basic award
- £9,800
- Compensatory award
- £75,983
Source document
Primary recordThe full judgment is available 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.