Case 2203678/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Penny v v Oasis Fashions Limited (in administration) — 2022
- Case reference
- 2203678/2020
- Decision date
- 8 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hawksworth Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Penny v
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed by Oasis Fashions Limited, which went into administration on 15 April 2020. She brought claims for a protective award for failure to consult, arrears of pay, holiday pay and notice pay. The administrators consented to the claim proceeding, and the respondent did not contest the protective award claim; the judgment records that a protective award judgment had been issued on 28 January 2022.
The remaining pay claims were listed for a video hearing on 18 July 2022. The tribunal had ordered the claimant to provide details of the sums claimed, supporting documents and a witness statement, but she did not provide that information. She also did not attend the hearing or contact the tribunal to explain her absence.
The tribunal found that the pay claims had not been actively pursued and that it appeared the claimant had decided not to pursue them. The arrears of pay, holiday pay and notice pay claims were dismissed under rule 47 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013, which relates to non-attendance at a hearing.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trade union | The judgment records that the claimant made a claim for a protective award for failure to consult, that the respondent did not contest it, and that judgment for a protective award was issued dated 28 January 2022. No amount is stated in this judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant's arrears of pay claim was dismissed under rule 47 after she did not comply with case management orders and did not attend the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claimant's holiday pay claim was dismissed under rule 47 after she did not comply with case management orders and did not attend the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claimant's notice pay claim was dismissed under rule 47 after she did not comply with case management orders and did not attend the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 rule 47
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.