Case 2300260/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C E Duffell v Mrs D Simpson (trading as Tantrum Hair Extensions) — 2022
- Case reference
- 2300260/2021
- Decision date
- 20 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Brown Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C E Duffell
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 20 July 2022, Employment Judge T Brown heard the case by Cloud Video Platform. The Respondent did not attend and was not represented. The tribunal recorded that the Claimant, Miss C E Duffell, was claiming against Mrs D Simpson trading as Tantrum Hair Extensions.
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal complaint because it had no jurisdiction to hear it. It found that the Claimant lacked the necessary qualifying period of employment, so the unfair dismissal claim could not proceed.
The tribunal upheld the Claimant's wage claim, finding that she had suffered an unauthorised deduction from wages in the sum of £633. It also upheld the breach of contract claim, finding that the Respondent had failed to pay notice pay of £306.85. The tribunal ordered the Respondent to pay both sums to the Claimant.
No written reasons were provided, and the judgment records only the oral reasons given at the hearing. The total monetary award recorded in the decision is £939.85.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to consider the unfair dismissal complaint because the Claimant lacked the necessary qualifying period of employment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages in the sum of £633 and ordered payment of that sum to the Claimant. | Upheld | — | £633 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found that the Respondent failed to pay notice pay in breach of contract and ordered payment of £306.85. | Upheld | — | £307 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £940
- across all upheld claims
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.