Case 1803638/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Shepherd v Abbey Care and Education Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 1803638/2022
- Decision date
- 4 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Moxon Representation
- Venue
- Leeds via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Shepherd
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs A Shepherd's claims were heard at Leeds via CVP on 4 January 2023. Abbey Care and Education Limited did not attend and was not represented. The tribunal upheld her unfair dismissal complaints, finding that she was automatically unfairly dismissed because of a relevant transfer contrary to regulation 7 of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006, and also unfairly dismissed under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal further found that the respondent was in breach of contract by dismissing her without notice when she was entitled to ten weeks' notice. It also found two unauthorised deductions from wages: £193.93 for overtime worked and £77.56 for 5.5 hours taken as holiday, together totalling £271.49 gross. On holiday pay, the tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay 47.38 hours of accrued but untaken holiday and awarded £668.14 gross.
On remedy for unfair dismissal, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £4,759.65 and a compensatory award of £12,273.36. The compensatory award was broken down into loss of net income before the claimant obtained new work on 14 November 2022, loss between the new job and the hearing, future loss for 11 weeks, and £500 for loss of statutory rights. The Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 applied; the prescribed element was £10,649.38 for the period 23 March 2022 to 4 January 2023, and the balance over the prescribed element was £1,623.98. The summary paragraph states that the respondent should pay £10,516.36 and that the balance of the amount due under the unfair dismissal award would be paid after service of a DWP recoupment notice; that stated summary figure does not arithmetically match the itemised figures in the award paragraphs.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal upheld both automatic unfair dismissal because of a relevant transfer contrary to regulation 7 of TUPE 2006 and unfair dismissal under the Employment Rights Act 1996. Remedy paragraphs award a basic award of £4,759.65 and a compensatory award of £12,273.36. The summary paragraph states that £10,516.36 was payable and that the balance would follow recoupment, but that figure does not arithmetically match the itemised sums in the award paragraphs. | Upheld | — | £17,033 |
| Breach of contract | Found to be a breach of contract by wrongfully dismissing the claimant without notice when she was entitled to ten weeks' notice. | Upheld | — | £3,173 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions for £193.93 of overtime and £77.56 for 5.5 hours taken as holiday, totalling £271.49 gross. | Upheld | — | £271 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the respondent failed to pay for 47.38 hours of accrued but untaken holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £668 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,516
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £4,760
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £12,273
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.