Case 2500194/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Cawley v The Deck Nightclub — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500194/2023
- Decision date
- 28 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Loy REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Cawley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs L Cawley brought claims against The Deck Nightclub for unlawful deduction from wages, unpaid accrued holiday pay on termination, unpaid notice, compensation for mental health, loss of income and severe stress, and an itemised pay statement. The hearing took place at Newcastle by CVP on 14 April 2023 before Employment Judge Loy, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by its director, Mr A Zivanaris.
The tribunal dismissed the wage, holiday pay, notice pay and itemised pay statement claims, each being found not well-founded. It also held that the claim for compensation for mental health, loss of income and severe stress was not within the Tribunal's jurisdiction and failed. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claim for unlawful deduction from wages was not well-founded and failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the claim for unpaid accrued holiday pay upon termination of employment was not well-founded and failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claim for unpaid notice was not well-founded and failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The judgment describes this as a claim for compensation for mental health, loss of income and severe stress, and says it was not within the Tribunal's jurisdiction and failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The judgment states that the claim for an itemised pay statement was not well-founded and failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.