Mr M Goddard v MB Evans Ltd: 1600861/2022
JUDGMENT
[1]The claimant’s claim for a protective payment under s. 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 is dismissed on having been withdrawn.[2]The claimant’s complaint that there was an unauthorised deduction from his wages (holiday pay) is not well-founded. This means the claimant was not subject to unlawful deductions contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.[3]The claimant’s complaint that he was not provided with true written reasons for the dismissal contrary to s. 92 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is not well-founded.[4]The respondent was in breach of contract for dismissing the claimant without notice.[5]The claimant’s claim for unfair dismissal is well-founded. This means the respondent unfairly dismissed the claimant contrary to section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Case No: 1600861/2022 10.1 Judgment – no hearing - rule 60 February 2018[6]The period of loss over which the Claimant can claim a compensatory award is reduced by 100% under the principles of Polkey v A E Dayton Services.[7]The respondent shall pay the claimant the following sums: a £16,800 basic award for unfair dismissal. b £5,136 notice pay in respect of his breach of contract claim. This sum is net of tax and national insurance. These sums are calculated as follows;[1]Details Date of birth of claimant 31/07/1960 Date started employment 1997 Effective Date of Termination (EDT) 25/03/2022 Period of continuous service (years) 25 Age at EDT 61 Net weekly pay at EDT 428 Gross weekly pay at EDT 560 Gross annual pay at EDT 29120[2]Basic award Basic award Number of qualifying weeks (30) x Gross weekly pay (560) 16,800 Total basic award £16,800[4]Notice pay 12 weeks at £428 (net weekly pay) 5,136 Total compensation (other statutory rights) £5,136 Case No: 1600861/2022 10.1 Judgment – no hearing - rule 60 February 2018 Recoupment Prescribed period: 25/03/22 to 31/01/23 Total award £21,936 Prescribed element £0 Balance £21,936