Case 2303643/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 2303643/2019
- Decision date
- 7 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Britton Date
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 6 February 2020 at London South, Employment Judge Britton recorded that Miss Wells's unfair dismissal claim succeeded and that her breach of contract claim also succeeded. The tribunal ordered Little Learners Nursery to pay total compensation of £1,425.00. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The judgment also records that the respondent's counterclaim was dismissed. It further states that the claimant's claims for non-payment of holiday pay and outstanding wages were dismissed upon withdrawal. The written decision does not break the £1,425 award down between the successful claims.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim succeeded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay total compensation of £1,425.00, but the award was not apportioned between the successful claims. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim succeeded. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay total compensation of £1,425.00, but the award was not apportioned between the successful claims. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed upon withdrawal; the written judgment refers to outstanding wages together with holiday pay. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed upon withdrawal; the written judgment refers to non-payment of holiday pay together with outstanding wages. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | Respondent's counterclaim dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,425
- across all upheld claims
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.