Case 2300212/2019 · Employment Tribunal
in person For First v No appearance or — 2020
- Case reference
- 2300212/2019
- Decision date
- 20 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Truscott QC
Parties
2 namedClaimant
in person For First
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal awarded the claimant sums against the first respondent for unpaid wages for August and September 2018, unpaid holiday pay, one week's notice, and a redundancy payment. The judgment records that the claimant had been ordered to set out the sums alleged not to have been paid and any other claims, and that the sums awarded were those identified.
The tribunal dismissed the second respondent, the Local Authority, from the proceedings. It found that the Local Authority's involvement followed a service interruption and crisis intervention, during which it provided support, deployed staff, gave some on-the-ground management direction, and gave a non-binding guarantee about payment for the intervention period, but that there was no contractual relationship between the Local Authority and the claimant.
On TUPE, the tribunal found there was no business transfer and no service provision change. Mrs Dudhee remained the legal owner and responsible provider, no assets, contracts, staff, property, or residents transferred to the Local Authority, and the intervention was a short-term task rather than the transfer of a stable economic entity.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Awarded as unpaid wages for August 2018 and September 2018 against the first respondent. | Upheld | — | £4,447 |
| Holiday pay | Awarded as unpaid holiday pay against the first respondent. | Upheld | — | £658 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment describes this as an award for failure to give one week's notice. | Upheld | — | £313 |
| Redundancy | Awarded as a redundancy payment against the first respondent. | Upheld | — | £1,250 |
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The tribunal found there was no transfer of the claimant's employment to the second respondent and dismissed the second respondent from the proceedings. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,668
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
8 references- s.19 Care Act 2014
- TUPE Reg 3(1)(a)
- TUPE Reg 3(1)(b)
- TUPE Reg 3(3)
- Spijkers v Gebroeders Benedik Abbatoir CV
- Commercial Motors (Wales) Ltd v Howley
- North Wales Training and Enterprise Council Ltd (t/a Celtec) v Astley
- Rygaard v Stro Molle Akustik A/S
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.