Case 2300851/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Matthew v Signature Senior Lifestyles Operations Ltd Heard by Cloud video — 2021
- Case reference
- 2300851/2019
- Decision date
- 15 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Reed
- Panel members
- Ms A Rodney, Ms S Khawaja
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Matthew
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBefore Employment Judge Reed, sitting with Ms A Rodney and Ms S Khawaja, the tribunal heard Mrs A Matthew's claims against Signature Senior Lifestyles Operations Ltd and gave a unanimous judgment on 15 March 2021 after a Cloud video hearing on 15-17 February 2021.
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's race and age claims for direct discrimination, harassment, and victimisation. It found she was not directly discriminated against, harassed or victimised on the ground of race or age, and it also rejected her complaint that she had been subjected to detriments after raising matters she believed were harmful to health or safety.
The unfair dismissal claim failed because the tribunal found that the claimant was not dismissed. The claim for unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of holiday pay also failed.
The only claim upheld was breach of contract: the respondent failed to reimburse the claimant for solicitors' fees, and the tribunal awarded compensation of £360.
Claims and outcomes
10 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The tribunal's finding was that the claimant was not directly discriminated against on the ground of race or age. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | The tribunal's finding was that the claimant was not directly discriminated against on the ground of race or age. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal's finding was that the claimant was not harassed on the ground of race or age. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The tribunal's finding was that the claimant was not harassed on the ground of race or age. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal's finding was that the claimant was not victimised on the ground of race or age. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | The tribunal's finding was that the claimant was not victimised on the ground of race or age. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Other | The tribunal found the claimant was not subjected to detriments for bringing to the respondent's attention circumstances that she believed were harmful to health or safety. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £360
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £360
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.