Case 2303661/2022 · Employment Tribunal
S Drewett v Consultus Care and Nursing Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 2303661/2022
- Decision date
- 15 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burge Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
S Drewett
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the London South Employment Tribunal hearing on 15 June 2023 before Employment Judge Burge, the claimant S Drewett pursued an automatic unfair dismissal claim for asserting a statutory right and a claim concerning 3.5 days of accrued but untaken annual leave. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
The tribunal held that the automatic unfair dismissal claim was not well founded and dismissed it. It also found that the respondent made an unlawful deduction from the claimant's pay in respect of 3.5 days' accrued but untaken annual leave, so that part of the claim succeeded.
The extracted judgment does not state any monetary amount for the successful annual leave claim, and no separate remedy figures are recorded in the written judgment record provided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant's claim of automatic unfair dismissal for asserting a statutory right was held not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent made an unlawful deduction from the claimant's pay in respect of 3.5 days' accrued but untaken annual leave. No monetary sum is stated in the extracted judgment text. | 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.