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 namedClaimant
Andrew Palmer
Respondent
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 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Basic award £9,800 (12 years' service, age 45 at termination) plus compensatory award (loss of earnings, statutory rights, accommodation losses from eviction from tied pub flat, travel expenses) grossed-up to £75,982.63 after mitigation. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination claim implied by the injury to feelings award of £32,000 in upper end of middle Vento band plus £4,643.07 interest from suspension date 18.3.2024. Specific protected characteristic and statutory provision not identified in the judgment text supplied; tagged as disability based on the size of the ITF award and the inclusion of interest from suspension date suggesting an EqA claim, but confidence is reduced as the underlying basis is unclear from the available text. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Basic award £9,800 (12 years' service, age 45 at termination) plus compensatory award (loss of earnings, statutory rights, accommodation losses from eviction from tied pub flat, travel expenses) grossed-up to £75,982.63 after mitigation. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination claim implied by the injury to feelings award of £32,000 in upper end of middle Vento band plus £4,643.07 interest from suspension date 18.3.2024. Specific protected characteristic and statutory provision not identified in the judgment text supplied; tagged as disability based on the size of the ITF award and the inclusion of interest from suspension date suggesting an EqA claim, but confidence is reduced as the underlying basis is unclear from the available text. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £122,426
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £9,800
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £75,983
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Vento bands
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.