Case 2502162/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Ashes Care Group Ltd T/a Teasdale Lodge Nursing Home and Secretary of State for Business and Trade — 2025
- Case reference
- 2502162/2024
- Decision date
- 12 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs S Metcalfe and Mrs P Oakley brought joined claims against Ashes Care Group Limited t/a Teasdale Lodge Nursing Home and the Secretary of State for Business and Trade. The tribunal held that the claims for breach of contract (notice pay), unlawful deduction from wages, and a protective award were well founded. The holiday pay claims under the Working Time Regulations were dismissed.
The second respondent was ordered to pay notice pay of £1,229 to Mrs Metcalfe and £1,246.82 to Mrs Oakley. The unlawful deduction from wages claims succeeded, but the judgment records that no compensation award was made for them.
The tribunal also made a protective award under s.189 for employees dismissed from 13 March 2024 for a protected period of 56 days. The judgment states that both claimants were awarded £5,439.84 each payable by the second respondent.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Notice pay. The second respondent was ordered to pay £1,229 to Mrs S Metcalfe and £1,246.82 to Mrs P Oakley. | Upheld | — | £2,476 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claims were well founded, but the judgment states that no compensation award was made. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | Protective award under s.189. The judgment states that employees dismissed from 13 March 2024 were awarded a protected period of 56 days. Both claimants were awarded £5,439.84 each payable by the second respondent. The extracted text spells the statute/year as '2992'/'TULRC', which appears to be a typographical error. | Upheld | — | £10,880 |
| Holiday pay | Claims under the Working Time Regulations were not well founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,356
- 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.