Case 2603530/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs. L Elliott v The Montessori Group Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2603530/2020
- Decision date
- 6 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heap
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs. L Elliott
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Heap, sitting alone, recorded that the respondent did not attend and made no representations. The judgment states that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from Mrs Elliott's wages and ordered payment of £1,672.80 net.
The tribunal also found that Mrs Elliott was dismissed in breach of contract and awarded £1,476.00 for the notice to which she was entitled on termination. It further found that the respondent did not pay accrued but untaken annual leave on termination and ordered payment of £430.50 net for that complaint.
The tribunal found that Mrs Elliott was dismissed by reason of redundancy but was not paid a redundancy payment. It ordered the respondent to pay £2,214.00. The individual awards recorded in the judgment total £5,793.30; no interest or separate aggregate total was stated.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages and was ordered to pay £1,672.80 net. | Upheld | — | £1,673 |
| Breach of contract | The claimant was dismissed in breach of contract and awarded notice pay of £1,476.00. | Upheld | — | £1,476 |
| Holiday pay | The respondent did not pay accrued but untaken annual leave on termination and was ordered to pay £430.50 net. | Upheld | — | £431 |
| Redundancy | The claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy but was not paid a redundancy payment, and was awarded £2,214.00. | Upheld | — | £2,214 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,793
- 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.