Case 2302545/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs T Hall v Mini Treasures UK Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2302545/2018
- Decision date
- 28 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs T Hall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal entered judgment under Rule 21 because the claim was served on the respondent on 21 November 2018 and the response time limit had expired without a response. The judgment records that the claimant's claim was therefore granted in her favour under the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Schedule 1.
The judgment does not set out separate liability reasons for each pleaded head of claim, but the case listing identifies the proceedings as including unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction from wages. On the face of this short Rule 21 judgment, those claims were allowed to proceed in the claimant's favour by default rather than after an adversarial merits determination.
No compensation figure is recorded in this judgment. Instead, the tribunal listed a further hearing for 12 September 2019 to address remedy (compensation).
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Default judgment under Rule 21 was entered in the claimant's favour; the short judgment did not separately set out liability findings by head of claim or apportion any remedy. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Default judgment under Rule 21 was entered in the claimant's favour; the short judgment did not separately set out liability findings by head of claim or apportion any remedy. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution & Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 Schedule 1
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.