Case 2501406/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Clare Healey v Loyal Care Centre Ltd (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) — 2019
- Case reference
- 2501406/2019
- Decision date
- 22 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sweeney Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Clare Healey
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss Clare Healey brought claims against Loyal Care Centre Ltd (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation). Employment Judge Sweeney recorded that the respondent did not appear. The tribunal held that the claim for unlawful deductions in respect of arrears of pay was well founded and ordered the respondent to pay £322.17 gross.
The tribunal also held that the claim of wrongful dismissal was well founded and ordered payment of £2,078 gross. The judgment states that this was a gross figure and that the claimant was responsible for any tax or national insurance due on it.
A further claim for outstanding holiday pay was also found well founded and succeeded. The tribunal ordered payment of £1,830.12 gross. The judgment does not set out any additional reasons beyond the findings recorded in the dispositive section.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim described as unlawful deductions in respect of arrears of pay; tribunal ordered payment of the gross sum. | Upheld | — | £322 |
| Wrongful dismissal | Tribunal found the claim well founded and ordered payment of the gross sum, described as gross and subject to the claimant accounting for any tax or national insurance. | Upheld | — | £2,078 |
| Holiday pay | Claim for payment of outstanding holiday pay was found well founded and succeeded. | Upheld | — | £1,830 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,230
- across all upheld claims
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.