Case 1601043/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Janina Massey T/a Hair 2 Go — 2020
- Case reference
- 1601043/2019
- Decision date
- 10 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting alone, held that Mrs A Jones’s claim of unfair dismissal was well founded within the meaning of section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The extracted judgment does not set out the fuller factual reasoning for liability beyond that conclusion.
On remedy, the tribunal ordered the respondent, Janina Massey t/a Hair 2 Go, to pay a basic award of £270.00 and a compensatory award of £1,025.00. The compensatory award was made up of £350.00 for loss of statutory rights and £675.00 for loss of earnings for five weeks at £135.00 net per week.
The total award was £1,295.00. The judgment was dated 9 January 2020 and sent to the parties on 10 January 2020.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claim was well founded within the meaning of section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The award was not split between claims because only one claim was determined. | Upheld | — | £1,295 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,295
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £270
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £1,025
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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.