Case 2410693/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Prendergast v Capstone Care Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2410693/2019
- Decision date
- 19 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Howard Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Prendergast
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Manchester Employment Tribunal on 17 March 2020 before Employment Judge Howard. The judgment records that, upon the parties having agreed terms set out in the schedule annexed to the judgment, and by consent, the claims of unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal succeed.
No substantive reasons on liability are given in the extracted text. The judgment states that the agreed terms were set out in an annexed schedule retained by the tribunal, and that the proceedings were dismissed following that agreement. The extracted text does not include the schedule itself, so no monetary or other remedy terms can be identified from the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Decided by consent after the parties agreed terms set out in the schedule annexed to the judgment; the proceedings were then dismissed. | Settled | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Decided by consent after the parties agreed terms set out in the schedule annexed to the judgment; the proceedings were then dismissed. | Settled | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.