Case 3300668/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Kathryn Welch v Nash Homecare Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 3300668/2024
- Decision date
- 9 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Foxwell Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Kathryn Welch
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing at Watford on 9 September 2024, Regional Employment Judge Foxwell dealt with case numbers 3300668/2024 and 3306020/2024. The judgment records that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear the respondent’s employer contract claim, so that claim was dismissed.
The claimant’s wages claim succeeded. The Tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered Nash Homecare Limited to pay the claimant the gross sum of £2,112.90. The written record states that reasons were given orally and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal found the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £2,112.90 gross. | Upheld | — | £2,113 |
| Breach of contract | The Tribunal said it did not have jurisdiction to hear the respondent’s employer contract claim in case number 3306020/2024. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,113
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.