Case 2405574/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Pegg v Lisa Blissett — 2021
- Case reference
- 2405574/2020
- Decision date
- 7 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Grundy
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Pegg
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Grundy, sitting alone, declared that Miss Pegg's employment was continuing and that no dismissal had taken place. On that basis, the unfair dismissal claim failed and was dismissed. The separate claim for notice pay also failed and was dismissed.
The tribunal dismissed the holiday pay claim. It upheld the claim for unauthorised deduction from wages under s13 Employment Rights Act 1996 and ordered Lisa Blissett to pay £28.38 for the period 2 March to 26 March 2020 and £133.47 for the period 27 March to 10 July 2020, making a total award of £161.85.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal declared that the claimant's employment was continuing and that no dismissal had taken place. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claim for notice pay failed because the tribunal found that no dismissal had taken place. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim in respect of holiday pay was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim succeeded under s13 Employment Rights Act 1996. The award was £28.38 for 2 March to 26 March 2020 and £133.47 for 27 March to 10 July 2020. | Upheld | — | £162 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £162
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.13 Employment Rights Act 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.