Back to Search

Ms Sullivan v Solent Composite Systems Ltd and Solent Composite Solutions Ltd: 1400771/2019

Employment Tribunal

Published on 28 February 2020, 10:28

Summary
Employment Tribunal decision.
categories
breach-of-contract equal-pay-act sex-discrimination unlawful-deduction-from-wages working-time-regulations
country
england-and-wales
decision date
2020-02-07

Official Documents

  • Ms Sullivan v Solent Composite Systems Ltd and Solent Composite Solutions Ltd: 1400771/2019 - Judgment

Change History

  • First published.

Full Decision Text

Raw text extracted from the official documents.

Case Number: 1400771/2019 1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant Respondent Ms Sullivan v 1. Solent Composite Systems Ltd 2. Solent Composite Solutions Ltd Heard at: Southampton On: 7 February 2020 Before: Employment Judge Rayner Appearances For the Claimant: in person For the Respondent: Not attending JUDGMENT 1. The claimants work was equal to that of her comparator Mr C Bernson in that it was like work. 2. The first Respondent will pay the claimant the total sum of £9113.24, comprising £9008.87 net as compensation for past pay inequality and the sum of £104.37 for expenses of copying and associated costs incurred in bringing the claim. 3. The claimants claim against the 2nd Respondent is dismissed. ____________________________ Employment Judge Rayner Dated: 7 February 2020 ……………………………………. Case Number: 1400771/2019 2 Note: online publication of judgments and reasons The ET is required to maintain a register of all judgments and written reasons. The register must be accessible to the public. It has recently been moved online. All judgments and reasons since February 2017 are now available at: https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions. The ET has no power to refuse to place a judgment or reasons on the online register, or to remove a judgment or reasons from the register once they have been placed there. If you consider that these documents should be anonymised in any way prior to publication, you will need to apply to the ET for an order to that effect under Rule 50 of the ET's Rules of Procedure. Such an application would need to be copied to all other parties for comment and it would be carefully scrutinised by a judge (where appropriate, with panel members) before deciding whether (and to what extent) anonymity should be granted to a party or a witness

Related Parties

Search the database for other cases involving these individuals or companies.