Case 3201306/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Foxwell v Dial A Carer (South West) Ltd and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 3201306/2020
- Decision date
- 14 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardiner Members
- Panel members
- Mrs S Jeary, Ms K Labinjo
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs J Foxwell
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mrs J Foxwell's employment transferred from Dial a Carer Group Limited to 3HA Limited on 22 January 2020 under Regulation 4 of TUPE 2006. Once that transfer finding was made, the tribunal said the remainder of the claims against the first respondent were not well founded and were dismissed. The specific complaint that the first respondent failed to inform and consult was dismissed upon withdrawal.
By consent, the claimant was awarded £1,000 from 3HA for failure to inform and consult about the transfer and £750 for failure to provide a full and complete statement of employment particulars. The judgment records the first sum as being under Regulation 13 TUPE in the order and under Regulation 15 TUPE in the reasons.
On arrears of pay, the claimant argued that she should have been paid for 30 contact hours per week at £9.20. The tribunal held that the transferred contract guaranteed a minimum of 30 hours a week at £9 per hour, with contact hours later increased to £9.20 and travelling time remaining at £9. On the respondent's spreadsheet, the claimant had 91.75 fewer contact hours but had also been paid £982.45 in travel pay, which represented just over 109 hours, so the tribunal found she had received more than the minimum and dismissed the arrears claim.
On holiday pay, the tribunal held that section 11 Employment Rights Act 1996 allowed it to determine what should have been included in the statement of particulars about holiday entitlement, but not whether 3HA had breached the holiday term or whether a disputed July 2020 payment had discharged accrued but untaken holiday pay. It therefore made no merits finding on that issue.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The tribunal held that the claimant's employment transferred from Dial a Carer Group Limited to 3HA Limited by reason of Regulation 4 of TUPE 2006 on 22 January 2020. | Upheld | — | — |
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | By consent, the claimant was awarded £1,000 for failure to inform and consult about the transfer. The judgment order refers to Regulation 13 TUPE 2006, while the reasons refer to Regulation 15 TUPE 2006. | Settled | — | £1,000 |
| Other | By consent, the claimant was awarded £750 for failure to provide a full and complete statement of employment particulars under section 38 Employment Act 2002, read with sections 1 and 4 Employment Rights Act 1996. | Settled | — | £750 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The arrears of pay claim failed. Although the claimant showed 91.75 fewer contact hours at £9.20 per hour, the tribunal found she had also been paid £982.45 in travel pay, so she received more than the minimum 30 hours per week to which the contract entitled her. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal held that section 11 Employment Rights Act 1996 allowed it to identify the holiday terms that should have been stated, but not to determine whether 3HA had breached the holiday term or whether a July 2020 payment discharged accrued but untaken holiday pay. It therefore made no merits finding on that issue. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,750
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
7 references- Regulation 4 TUPE 2006
- Regulation 4(4) TUPE 2006
- Regulation 13 TUPE 2006
- Regulation 15 TUPE 2006
- Section 38 Employment Act 2002
- Sections 1 and 4 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Section 11 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.