Case 3315326/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Gallagher v Pinford End Nursing Home — 2024
- Case reference
- 3315326/2023
- Decision date
- 29 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Graham Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Gallagher
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Watford Employment Tribunals and the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, proceeding to judgment without a full hearing.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages, had dismissed the claimant in breach of contract in respect of notice, had dismissed her by reason of redundancy entitling her to a redundancy payment, and had failed to pay her holiday entitlement. Awards were made on each head: £750.24 gross for unlawful deductions, £1,000.32 for breach of contract (notice), £1,500.48 for redundancy, and £500.16 for holiday pay.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £3,751.20 in total. The judgment was issued by Employment Judge Graham and sent to the parties on 27 January 2025.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages; awarded £750.24 gross. | Upheld | — | £750 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages of £1,000.32. | Upheld | — | £1,000 |
| Redundancy | Claimant dismissed by reason of redundancy; statutory redundancy payment of £1,500.48. | Upheld | — | £1,500 |
| Holiday pay | Respondent failed to pay holiday entitlement; awarded £500.16. Listed by gov.uk under Working Time Regulations. | Upheld | — | £500 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,751
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.