Case 2500867/2021 · Employment Tribunal
SAMANTHA WELDON 1st v HOLLY JOHNSTON 2nd Respondent: and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 2500867/2021
- Decision date
- 21 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge RODGER
- Venue
- NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE CIVIL AND FAMILY TRIBUNAL CENTRE
Parties
3 namedClaimant
SAMANTHA WELDON 1st
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting alone before Employment Judge Rodger on 18 February 2022, dismissed the claimant’s claim against the first respondent, Holly Johnston, as not well-founded. The judgment does not identify the underlying legal basis for that dismissed claim in the dispositive section.
The tribunal upheld the claim against the second respondent, Resources Care t/a My Home Care DDNY Limited, for unauthorised deduction of wages in contravention of section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It also upheld the claimant’s claim for compensation for failure to give a written statement of initial employment particulars in contravention of section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal ordered the second respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £1,329.62. The judgment does not break that sum down between the two upheld claims, and it does not record any separate award for interest or other heads of compensation.
Claims and outcomes
3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment dismisses the claim against the first respondent as not well-founded, but the dispositive section does not specify the underlying legal cause of action. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 against the second respondent. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | Claim for compensation for failure to give a written statement of initial employment particulars under section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment does not specify a separate monetary figure for this claim. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,330
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.