Case 1600752/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Courtney Hampton First Respondent Second v Your Building Expert Ltd A1 Home Emergency 247 Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1600752/2022
- Decision date
- 23 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge HV Dieu
- Venue
- Port Talbot
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Courtney Hampton First Respondent Second
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that the claimant's employment transferred pursuant to TUPE from Your Building Expert Ltd to A1 Home Emergency 247 Ltd on 1 April 2022. It also found that the claimant's claim for unlawful deduction from wages was well founded and ordered the second respondent to pay £2,313.69.
The tribunal further found that the claimant's breach of contract claim was well founded, but made no award because she was already compensated through loss of wages. It made the same finding in relation to the claim for unpaid accrued holiday pay, again making no separate award for that reason.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The tribunal found that the claimant's employment transferred from Your Building Expert Ltd to A1 Home Emergency 247 Ltd on 1 April 2022 under TUPE. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim was found well founded. The second respondent was ordered to pay £2,313.69. | Upheld | — | £2,314 |
| Breach of contract | The claim was found well founded, but the tribunal made no award because the claimant was already compensated through loss of wages. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for unpaid accrued holiday pay was found well founded, but the tribunal made no award because the claimant was already compensated through loss of wages. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,314
- 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.