Case 2601224/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss R Smith v Bells Day Nursery Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2601224/2020
- Decision date
- 2 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heap
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss R Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Heap gave a Rule 21 judgment in favour of Miss R Smith against Bells Day Nursery Limited. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £906.68 gross, subject to any tax and national insurance due on that amount.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £322.23. It further found that she was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,266.68. In addition, the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement, and the tribunal ordered payment of £895.70 gross, again subject to any tax and national insurance due on that amount.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Ordered to pay the gross sum of £906.68, less any sums for tax and national insurance due on that amount. | Upheld | — | £907 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages awarded in the sum of £322.23. | Upheld | — | £322 |
| Redundancy | Found to have been dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,266.68. | Upheld | — | £2,267 |
| Holiday pay | Ordered to pay the sum of £895.70, less any sums for tax and national insurance due on that amount. | Upheld | — | £896 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,391
- 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.