Case 6018777/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Aiton v The Abbots Lea Pub Co Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6018777/2024
- Decision date
- 4 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Yallop REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Aiton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at Southampton by CVP on 2 to 3 October 2025 before Employment Judge Yallop. The claimant, Mr P Aiton, appeared in person and the respondent, The Abbots Lea Pub Co Ltd, was represented by counsel. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written record states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal complaint as not well-founded. It also dismissed the breach of contract complaint concerning notice pay and the holiday pay complaint, each on the basis that they were not well-founded.
The separate complaint for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars was dismissed because the tribunal did not find in favour of the claimant on any of the other complaints. No monetary award is recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Complaint in relation to notice pay was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Complaint for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.