Case 2413959/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Townley v Coffee Limited and 2 others — 2020
- Case reference
- 2413959/2019
- Decision date
- 28 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Miss K Townley
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss K Townley's breach of contract claim succeeded against the third respondent, Coffee United (Bootle 1) Ltd. The tribunal held that the third respondent breached her contract of employment in respect of notice and ordered it to pay damages of £126.
The claims against the first and second respondents, Coffee Limited and Coffee United Ltd, were dismissed on withdrawal. The written record states that the decision was given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested, so the published judgment records the outcome without setting out fuller reasoning.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The third respondent, Coffee United (Bootle 1) Ltd, was found to have breached the claimant's contract of employment in respect of notice and was ordered to pay damages of £126 within 14 days. | Upheld | — | £126 |
| Breach of contract | The claims against the first and second respondents, Coffee Limited and Coffee United Ltd, were dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £126
- 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.