Case 3201456/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Antonio v GCH (South) Limited t/a Hillside Nursing Home — 2021
- Case reference
- 3201456/2020
- Decision date
- 15 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardiner Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Antonio
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs L Antonio worked for GCH (South) Limited t/a Hillside Nursing Home from 28 October 2018 until her resignation on 11 July 2020. The tribunal found that, from September 2019 onwards, the respondent repeatedly required her to complete mandatory refresher training. It accepted the respondent's evidence that the training could be done at home or at work and would have been paid, and found that the claimant did not complete any of it. The tribunal also found that the job description and terms allowed the respondent to require additional duties and additional training, and that the claimant had agreed to those terms by continuing in work after receiving the revised job description.
The unauthorised deduction from wages claim was dismissed. The tribunal held that the respondent was entitled to refuse to provide work from 4 January 2020 because the claimant had not completed the training and was therefore not ready, willing and able to do the work the respondent was entitled to require. It found the claimant's case that she had completed the training was not supported by the contemporaneous emails or records. The tribunal also rejected her assertion that she was entitled to statutory sick pay, noting the absence of fit notes, self-certification forms, or other medical evidence, and the absence of compliant notification under the statutory sick pay rules.
The holiday pay claim succeeded. The parties agreed that 64 hours of accrued but untaken holiday remained due when the employment ended, and the tribunal awarded £659.20 gross under regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. That sum was calculated at the claimant's hourly rate of £10.30.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the respondent was entitled to refuse work because the claimant had not completed mandatory training and was not ready, willing and able to perform the work required. It also rejected the claimant's asserted entitlement to SSP for lack of medical evidence and compliant notification. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The parties agreed that 64 hours of accrued but untaken holiday remained due at termination. The tribunal awarded 64 hours at the claimant's hourly rate of £10.30, producing £659.20 gross. | Upheld | — | £659 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £659
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.13(3) ERA 1996
- ready, willing and able to
- s.151 SSCBA 1992
- s.156 SSCBA 1992
- Regulation 7 of the Statutory Sick Pay (General) Regulations 1992
- Regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998
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.