Case 2300807/2020 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Mr A Tayson (2) Mrs N Tayson v Wentworth International College — 2020
- Case reference
- 2300807/2020
- Decision date
- 17 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Pritchard Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Mr A Tayson (2) Mrs N Tayson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment entered for both claimants, Mr A Tayson and Mrs N Tayson, against Wentworth International College. Employment Judge Pritchard recorded that the Respondent unfairly dismissed both claimants.
The tribunal also found that the Respondent made unlawful deductions from wages and caused consequential losses, failed to compensate accrued but untaken holiday on termination, and breached the claimants' contracts by failing to give notice of termination or pay in lieu of notice. It further found that the Respondent failed to provide itemised pay statements to either claimant. The extracted text does not include any separate monetary awards, so no remedy figures can be identified from the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Judgment entered for both First and Second Claimants. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unlawful deductions from wages and consequential losses for both claimants. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the Respondent failed to compensate accrued but untaken holiday on termination. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found a breach of contract by failing to give notice of termination or pay in lieu of notice. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal found the Respondent failed to provide itemised pay statements to either claimant. | 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.