Case 2603780/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Thorp v Graham Lovegrove and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 2603780/2020
- Decision date
- 8 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ayre
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss J Thorp
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Ayre sitting alone on 8 January 2021, the respondents conceded that they had failed to provide Miss J Thorp with a written statement of employment particulars contrary to section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Judgment was therefore entered in the claimant's favour on that issue, and the tribunal directed that remedy would be determined at the final hearing.
The record states that Miss J Thorp had been employed by the respondents, who operated Grange Farm and a livery yard, as a groom from 22 June 2020 to 11 October 2020. The claim form presented on 12 October 2020 included complaints of unfair dismissal and age discrimination, and the case management section identified additional issues relating to alleged unauthorised deductions from wages and a detriment complaint under the National Minimum Wage Act 1998.
No substantive findings were made in this decision on the unfair dismissal, age discrimination, wage deduction, or National Minimum Wage Act issues. The hearing instead dealt with case management matters, including consent amendments to the respondent's name and the claim, directions for the exchange of documents and witness statements, and the listing of a final hearing for March 2022.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The respondents conceded at the preliminary hearing that they had failed to provide the claimant with a written statement of her employment particulars contrary to section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Judgment was entered for the claimant on that issue, and remedy was reserved to the final hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
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.