Case 1805003/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Burton Respondent 1: Respondent 2: Strong Life Care Limited Pam Banwaite HELD by telephone v Ms K Hodson, legal representative — 2020
- Case reference
- 1805003/2020
- Decision date
- 30 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shulman REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Burton Respondent 1: Respondent 2: Strong Life Care Limited Pam Banwaite HELD by telephone
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a telephone hearing on 10 November 2020 before Employment Judge Shulman, Miss C Burton brought claims against Strong Life Care Limited and Pam Banwaite for unauthorised deduction of wages, holiday pay, and notice pay. The tribunal recorded that the claimant withdrew the unauthorised deduction of wages and holiday pay claims, and those claims were dismissed on that basis.
The notice pay claim was admitted by the respondents and was found well founded. The judgment did not determine the monetary amount for that claim; it stated that the amount of notice pay would be fixed at the final hearing unless the parties agreed it earlier. No overall award was made in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim of unauthorised deduction of wages was dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for holiday pay was dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claim for notice pay was found well founded on the respondents' admission. The judgment did not fix the amount and said it would be determined at the final hearing unless agreed earlier. | Upheld | — | — |
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.