Case 2601694/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss River Turner v Prestigious Home Care Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 2601694/2021
- Decision date
- 30 April 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ahmed Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss River Turner
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Ahmed Date made a Rule 21 judgment after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The judgment was entered on the papers and the hearing listed for 3 December 2021 was cancelled.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £420 gross. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £1,680, being four weeks’ pay at £420 per week. The claimant was found to have been dismissed by reason of redundancy and was awarded a redundancy payment of £1,883, calculated on age 25, four years’ service and a weekly pay figure capped at £538. The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay holiday entitlement and ordered £588 gross, being seven days’ pay.
The judgment refused the claimant’s application concerning pension contributions paid but not credited to the NEST pension scheme, on the basis that this was not a matter within the jurisdiction of the Employment Tribunals.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Gross award for unauthorised deductions from wages. | Upheld | — | £420 |
| Breach of contract | Damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice, calculated as four weeks' pay at £420 per week. | Upheld | — | £1,680 |
| Redundancy | Redundancy payment calculated on age 25, four years' service and weekly pay capped at £538. | Upheld | — | £1,883 |
| Holiday pay | Gross award for unpaid holiday entitlement, being seven days' pay. | Upheld | — | £588 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,571
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.