Case 2404622/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss B Tinsley v 1st Class Nursery Ltd t/a First Chapter Day Nursery — 2023
- Case reference
- 2404622/2023
- Decision date
- 2 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Grundy
- Venue
- Liverpool Tribunal
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss B Tinsley
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss B Tinsley brought claims against 1st Class Nursery Ltd trading as First Chapter Day Nursery for unauthorised deductions from wages, week’s notice pay, and holiday pay. The hearing was before Employment Judge Grundy at Liverpool Tribunal on 24 July 2023. The respondent name was amended to the company’s trading name in the judgment.
The tribunal upheld the claim for payment of wages under s.13 ERA 1996. It found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of £105.86, made up of two sums of £52.93 for wages due on 23 and 25 January 2023.
The tribunal also upheld the claimant’s week’s notice pay claim pursuant to s.86 ERA 1996 and ordered payment of £158.80. The holiday pay claim was dismissed because it had been withdrawn by the claimant. The total sum payable by the respondent was £264.66.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim under s.13 ERA 1996 succeeded for two unpaid wage items of £52.93 each, relating to wages due on 23 and 25 January 2023. | Upheld | — | £106 |
| Breach of contract | The claimant succeeded on her week’s notice pay claim pursuant to s.86 ERA 1996 and was awarded £158.80. | Upheld | — | £159 |
| Holiday pay | The holiday pay claim was dismissed because it had been withdrawn by the claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £265
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.86 ERA 1996
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.