Case 1404018/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Churchill v Cafeteria la Crowns Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1404018/2020
- Decision date
- 6 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Midgley Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs K Churchill
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued by Employment Judge Midgley Date on 6 November 2020. The tribunal found Mrs K Churchill's claims against Cafeteria la Crowns Limited for unlawful deduction of wages, breach of contract, accrued but unpaid annual leave, failure to provide written particulars of employment, and failure to provide written reasons for dismissal to be well founded.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £903.90 for unlawful deduction of wages, £1,098.02 for holiday pay, £139.52 for notice pay, and £279.04 each for failure to provide employment particulars and failure to provide written reasons for dismissal. The total award was £2,699.52. The judgment does not set out further factual findings or legal analysis beyond recording those outcomes and sums.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £904 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded as notice pay. | Upheld | — | £140 |
| Holiday pay | Accrued but unpaid annual leave. | Upheld | — | £1,098 |
| Other | Failure to provide written particulars of employment; awarded at two weeks' pay. | Upheld | — | £279 |
| Other | Failure to provide written reasons for dismissal; awarded at two weeks' pay. | Upheld | — | £279 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,700
- across all upheld claims
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.