Case 3206848/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Enning Miss S Lamptey v Sozo Care Homes Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 3206848/2021
- Decision date
- 11 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Byrne Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Enning Miss S Lamptey
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case concerned claims by Miss M Enning and Miss S Lamptey against Sozo Care Homes Ltd for unauthorised deductions from wages, wrongful dismissal, and redundancy payment. The hearing took place by telephone before Employment Judge Byrne on 8 July 2022, with the claimants appearing in person and the respondent neither present nor represented.
The tribunal dismissed the unauthorised deductions from wages and wrongful dismissal claims because they had not been presented in time, even though it found it had been reasonably practicable to do so. It also dismissed the redundancy payment claims on the basis that they were not well-founded. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held the claims for unauthorised deductions from wages were not presented in time, despite it being reasonably practicable to do so. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal held the wrongful dismissal claims were not presented in time, despite it being reasonably practicable to do so. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The redundancy payment claims were found not well-founded and were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.