Case 2400082/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Hodgson & Others v Mellors Catering Services Ltd and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 2400082/2022
- Decision date
- 20 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss M Hodgson & Others
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the complaints brought by the claimants named in the schedule against the first respondent, Mellors Catering Services Ltd. The strike out followed a Consent Order dated 1 April 2022 giving the claimants an opportunity to make written representations as to why those complaints should not be struck out because they had no reasonable prospect of success.
The claimants did not make written representations. The Tribunal therefore recorded that the complaints against the first respondent were struck out by consent. The claims against the second respondent, Compass Group UK and Ireland Limited, remained listed for hearing on 14 June 2022.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records that the complaints against the first respondent, Mellors Catering Services Ltd, were struck out. The gov.uk category indicates unlawful deduction from wages, but the judgment text itself refers only to 'complaints' and does not describe the pleaded causes of action in detail. | Struck out | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment records that the complaints against the first respondent, Mellors Catering Services Ltd, were struck out. The gov.uk category indicates Working Time Regulations, but the judgment text itself refers only to 'complaints' and does not describe the pleaded causes of action in detail. | Struck out | — | — |
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.