Vol. I·6 May 2026

Search the index

Loading…

Loading page content.

Tribunal Watch

A structured, cross-cut index of UK employment tribunal decisions, built from the primary record at gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions. Independent of HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice.

Not legal advice. Information on this site is a matter of public record; it is not guidance on any individual case.

Editorial

About this site
Methodology
Corrections policy
Editorial standards

Rights & privacy

Open Government Licence v3.0
Privacy notice
Data subject requests
Atom feed (recent decisions)

Mrs H Hughes v Vedamain Ltd — Employment Tribunal 2023 | Tribunal Watch

Tribunal Watch/Vedamain Ltd/2418209/2020

Case 2418209/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs H Hughes v Vedamain Ltd — 2023

Case reference: 2418209/2020
Decision date: 10 January 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Horne Representatives
Venue: Liverpool

Indexed: 25 April 2026

Parties

5 named

Claimant

Mrs H Hughes

Respondents

Vedamain Ltd
Clakim Ltd (formerly known as Cabbey Private Hire Ltd)
Janbar Mg Ltd (formely known as Chester Private Hire Ltd)
Kajoliea Ltd (formerly known as Refer Ltd)

Claims brought

5 categories

Whistleblowing
Sex discrimination
Unfair dismissal
Unlawful deduction from wages
Working time regulations

Source tags (gov.uk)

Public Interest Disclosure
Sex Discrimination
Unfair Dismissal
Unlawful Deduction from Wages and Working Time Regulations

Outcomes per claim are extracted in a second pass and are not yet published on this page.

Source document

Primary record

The full judgment is available on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Judgment 1 (PDF)
Judgment 2 (PDF)
Judgment 3 (PDF)
Judgment 4 (PDF)
Judgment 5 (PDF)
Judgment 6 (PDF)
Judgment 7 (PDF)
Judgment 8 (PDF)
Judgment 9 (PDF)

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.