Case 3310767/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Kemp v Mr D Turner and Mrs M Turner trading as the Nook Café — 2025
- Case reference
- 3310767/2023
- Decision date
- 5 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Graham
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
- Panel members
- Mr D Hart, Mr T Doyle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Kemp
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal recorded that the complaint for unauthorised deductions succeeded in part and ordered the Respondents to pay the Claimant £132.34 gross.
The Tribunal also found that the Respondents breached the duty to provide an initial statement of particulars under s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996 and ordered payment of £661.70. All other complaints failed and were dismissed. The judgment states that reasons were given orally and does not include written reasons.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the complaint for unauthorised deductions succeeds in part. | Upheld | — | £132 |
| Other | The judgment states that the Respondents breached the duty to provide an initial statement of particulars under s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £662 |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that all other complaints fail and are dismissed; no written reasons are included. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that all other complaints fail and are dismissed; no written reasons are included. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The judgment states that all other complaints fail and are dismissed; no written reasons are included. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The judgment states that all other complaints fail and are dismissed; no written reasons are included. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment states that all other complaints fail and are dismissed; no written reasons are included. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £794
- 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.