Case 1405079/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Anne Phair v AND Heidi Louise Morgan Trading as Curae Home Care — 2020
- Case reference
- 1405079/2019
- Decision date
- 12 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Anne Phair
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with the case under Rule 21 because the time for presenting a response had expired and no valid response had been presented. In that position, it accepted the claimant's claims and entered judgment in chambers on 12 March 2020.
Mrs Anne Phair was awarded a statutory redundancy payment of £1,332.66, calculated in the judgment as 7 x 1.5 x £126.92 gross per week. The tribunal also held that her claim for unlawful deduction from wages succeeded and ordered the respondent, Heidi Louise Morgan trading as Curae Home Care, to pay £580.40 gross.
The claimant's claim for accrued but unpaid holiday pay also succeeded. The tribunal ordered payment of two weeks' pay in the gross sum of £253.84. The total monetary outcome recorded in the judgment is £2,166.90.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Tribunal awarded a statutory redundancy payment calculated as 7 x 1.5 x £126.92 gross per week. | Upheld | — | £1,333 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim succeeded and the respondent was ordered to pay the gross sum of £580.40. | Upheld | — | £580 |
| Holiday pay | Claim for accrued but unpaid holiday pay succeeded; the award was two weeks' pay in the gross sum of £253.84. | Upheld | — | £254 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,167
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21
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.