Case 2415661/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Ms Clare Pritchard Mr Stephen Mundy Ms Maria Wood Miss N Dixon v Casual Dining Services Ltd (dissolved) — 2021

Case reference: 2415661/2020
Decision date: 13 September 2021
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Slater

Indexed: 20 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms Clare Pritchard Mr Stephen Mundy Ms Maria Wood Miss N Dixon

Respondent

Casual Dining Services Ltd (dissolved)

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The judgment was made under Rule 21. The Tribunal found the claimants' complaint under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 well-founded, concerning the respondent's failure to comply with the requirements of sections 188 and 188A of that Act.

The Tribunal made a protective award under section 189(3), ordering the respondent to pay each claimant a payment equivalent to remuneration for 90 days beginning on 2 July 2020. The judgment also stated that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 apply to the award.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Other	Protective award claim under section 189 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 for alleged failure to comply with sections 188 and 188A. The judgment awarded each claimant remuneration for 90 days from 2 July 2020, but did not state monetary amounts.	Upheld	—	—

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.