Case 2405072/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Jenning v Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service — 2019
- Case reference
- 2405072/2019
- Decision date
- 19 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Jenning
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs L Jenning brought a claim against Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service at Manchester. Employment Judge Ainscough sat alone and gave judgment on 18 November 2019. The tribunal recorded that the claimant's unlawful deduction from wages claim under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was dismissed on withdrawal.
The tribunal also dealt with a separate claim for entitlement to payment of statutory sick pay. That claim was struck out under Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 because it had no reasonable prospects of success, and the tribunal stated that it had no jurisdiction to hear it. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the unlawful deduction from wages claim contrary to section 13 ERA 1996 was 'dismissed on withdrawal'. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | The claimant's claim for entitlement to payment of statutory sick pay was struck out under Rule 37 as having no reasonable prospects of success; the tribunal also stated that it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Rule 37 Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.