Case 1811258/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Singh v Phoenix Care Limited T/A Last Minute Care and Nursing and 2 others — 2025
- Case reference
- 1811258/2024
- Decision date
- 28 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Miller
- Venue
- Leeds
- Panel members
- Mr D Eales, Mr W Roberts
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Ms M Singh
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal upheld the claimant's monetary complaints. The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well-founded for the period 25 September 2023 to 2 February 2024, and the respondent was ordered to pay £5,918.36 gross. The holiday pay complaint was also well-founded under regulation 14(2) and/or 16(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, with an award of £833.70.
The tribunal found the respondent in breach of its duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars when proceedings were begun. It concluded there were no exceptional circumstances making a two-week award unjust or inequitable, and that it was just and equitable to award four weeks' gross pay under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002, totalling £1,588.08.
The complaints of direct race, religious belief and sex discrimination, and the corresponding harassment complaints related to those characteristics, were not well-founded and were dismissed. Written reasons were not provided as the reasons were given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
9 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction from wages for the period 25 September 2023 to 2 February 2024; gross sum awarded. | Upheld | — | £5,918 |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay in accordance with regulation 14(2) and/or 16(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998. | Upheld | — | £834 |
| Other | Section 38 Employment Act 2002 award for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars; four weeks' gross pay. | Upheld | — | £1,588 |
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination complaint not well-founded. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Direct religious belief discrimination complaint not well-founded. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Sex discrimination | Direct sex discrimination complaint not well-founded. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Harassment | Harassment related to race not well-founded. | Dismissed |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,340
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- regulation 14(2) and/or 16(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
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.