Case 2300877/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L. Kilmaite v Manor Restaurants Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2300877/2020
- Decision date
- 20 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mason Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L. Kilmaite
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment made in the absence of an ET3 response from the respondent, Manor Restaurants Ltd. The Employment Judge said there was sufficient material to determine the matter and held that the claims of disability discrimination and unlawful deductions from wages/breach of contract succeeded.
On the wages and contract element, the tribunal awarded the claimant £565.00 for unpaid SSP and £85.43 for pension contributions. It also awarded £253.53 for overdraft charges incurred by the claimant as financial loss flowing from the unlawful deductions, relying on s24(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The disability discrimination claim was not finally quantified in this judgment. The tribunal directed that a remedy hearing would take place at 2.00pm on 7 December 2020 to determine remedy for that claim.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment says a remedy hearing will take place on 7 December 2020 to determine remedy for the disability discrimination claim. | Upheld | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as the claims of unlawful deductions from wages/breach of contract succeeding. It awards £565.00 for unpaid SSP, £85.43 for pension contributions, and £253.53 for overdraft charges as financial loss under s24(2) ERA 1996; the award is not split between the two labels. | Upheld | — | £904 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £904
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21, Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- s24(2) ERA 1996
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.