Case 2301556/2023 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Ms Montana Grace Thompson (2) Ms Hannah Louise Davies v Group Momentum (Salons) Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2301556/2023
- Decision date
- 8 November 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Evans
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Ms Montana Grace Thompson (2) Ms Hannah Louise Davies
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 10 August 2023, Employment Judge Evans entered a Rule 21 judgment in the proceedings brought by Ms Montana Grace Thompson and Ms Hannah Louise Davies against Group Momentum (Salons) Ltd, under case numbers 2301556/2023 and 2301557/2023. The judgment records that the claimants' claims succeed.
The extracted text does not set out findings of fact, reasons, or a breakdown of the claims. It states that the remedy to which the claimants are entitled will be determined at the hearing on 8 November 2023, so no monetary award is recorded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim type inferred from the GOV.UK jurisdiction listing; the extracted judgment only states that the claimants' claims succeed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Redundancy | Claim type inferred from the GOV.UK jurisdiction listing; the extracted judgment only states that the claimants' claims succeed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Claim type inferred from the GOV.UK jurisdiction listing; the extracted judgment only states that the claimants' claims succeed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim type inferred from the GOV.UK jurisdiction listing; the extracted judgment only states that the claimants' claims succeed. | Upheld | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Claim type inferred from the GOV.UK jurisdiction listing; the extracted judgment only states that the claimants' claims succeed. | 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.