Case 2502244/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Dos Reis Antunes v Time-to-Care Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2502244/2019
- Decision date
- 30 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Representation
- Venue
- North Shields Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Dos Reis Antunes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 9 September 2019, Miss M Dos Reis Antunes said she did not wish to pursue most of her claims and said she was not entirely clear what she had claimed in her ET1. Employment Judge Martin explained that her concern about the Inland Revenue was outside the tribunal's jurisdiction, but that the judgment would record the employment details relevant to her position.
The tribunal recorded that the claimant started work for Time-to-Care Limited on 30 January 2019 as a support worker and that her employment ended in or around 18 February 2019. It found that she had worked for about three weeks and had not been paid any wages for the whole period of her employment.
The complaints of unfair dismissal, breach of contract (notice pay), age discrimination, race discrimination and redundancy payment were dismissed upon withdrawal. The claims for unlawful deduction from wages and breach of the Working Time Regulations in respect of holiday pay were well-founded. The respondent was ordered to pay £890 gross for unpaid wages and £63.75 gross for accrued holiday pay.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed upon withdrawal after the claimant said she did not wish to pursue it. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed upon withdrawal after the claimant said she did not wish to pursue it. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Age discrimination | Dismissed upon withdrawal after the claimant said she did not wish to pursue it. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
| Race discrimination | Dismissed upon withdrawal after the claimant said she did not wish to pursue it. | Withdrawn | Race | — |
| Redundancy | Dismissed upon withdrawal after the claimant said she did not wish to pursue it. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim found well-founded; the respondent was ordered to pay £890.00 gross for unpaid wages. | Upheld | — | £890 |
| Holiday pay | Claim found well-founded; the respondent was ordered to pay £63.75 gross for accrued holiday pay. | Upheld |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £954
- 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.