Case 3315334/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss N Croucher v Pinford End Nursing Home — 2024
- Case reference
- 3315334/2023
- Decision date
- 29 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Graham Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss N Croucher
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was made under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge decided that the claim, or part of it, could properly be determined without a response.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,125.36 gross. It also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, with damages of £1,304.00.
The tribunal further found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £4,890. The total sum ordered was £7,319.36.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment following the respondent's failure to present a valid response on time. | Upheld | — | £1,125 |
| Breach of contract | Damages awarded for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £1,304 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £4,890 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,319
- 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.