Case 2503458/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs T Fos v Rascals Playtime Childcare Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2503458/2019
- Decision date
- 19 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspden
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs T Fos
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in favour of Mrs T Fos against Rascals Playtime Childcare Limited. Employment Judge Aspden recorded that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages, had dismissed the claimant in breach of contract in respect of notice, and had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £2,530 gross for the unlawful deduction from wages, £440 gross for breach of contract, and £880 gross for unpaid holiday entitlement. No separate findings on discrimination, unfair dismissal, or other claims appear in the judgment.
The listed hearing on 13 December 2019 was cancelled. The judgment does not set out any further reasoning, legal test, or apportionment beyond the specific sums ordered.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £2,530. | Upheld | — | £2,530 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £440 gross. | Upheld | — | £440 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £880 gross. | Upheld | — | £880 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,850
- 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.