Case 2500372/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs P Slater v Learning Curve Group — 2020

Case reference: 2500372/2020
Decision date: 22 April 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Johnson

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs P Slater

Respondent

Learning Curve Group

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a Rule 21 judgment in which the respondent did not present a response. On the information available to Employment Judge Johnson, the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, breach of contract, and unlawful sex discrimination were found to be well-founded and all succeeded.

The judgment did not determine compensation. It converted the listed hearing on 11 May 2020 into a remedy hearing by telephone, directed that the parties would be notified of the arrangements, and stated that the respondent would only be permitted to take part to the extent allowed by the tribunal judge. The claimant was ordered to provide a fully itemised statement of remedy by 5 May 2020.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	Held well-founded under a Rule 21 judgment because the respondent failed to present a response and the judge decided the claim on the information available.	Upheld	—	—
Breach of contract	Held well-founded under a Rule 21 judgment because the respondent failed to present a response and the judge decided the claim on the information available.	Upheld	—	—
Sex discrimination	Held well-founded as unlawful sex discrimination in a Rule 21 judgment because the respondent failed to present a response and the judge decided the claim on the information available.	Upheld	Sex	—

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.

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.