Case 2402033/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Mounfield v Anthology Pub and Kitchen Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2402033/2021
- Decision date
- 3 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Holmes Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Mounfield
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was determined under Rule 21 because the time for presenting a response had expired and no valid response had been presented by the respondent. Employment Judge Holmes entered judgment without a hearing on the papers. No findings are recorded beyond the claims and sums awarded.
The Tribunal held that Anthology Pub and Kitchen Limited had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £2,160.00 net. It also held that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £400.00 net in damages.
The Tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,600.00 net. The judgment notice states that sums unpaid after 14 days may carry interest under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, but no separate interest figure is set out in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £2,160.00. | Upheld | — | £2,160 |
| Breach of contract | The Tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £400.00 net. | Upheld | — | £400 |
| Holiday pay | The Tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,600.00 net. | Upheld | — | £1,600 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,160
- 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.