Case 3321486/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Did not attend and was not represented For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 3321486/2019
- Decision date
- 6 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Forde Members
- Venue
- Watford
- Panel members
- Mrs G Bhatt, MBE, Ms S Johnstone
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Did not attend and was not represented For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis case was heard at Watford Employment Tribunal on 6 March 2023 before Employment Judge Forde, sitting with Mrs G Bhatt, MBE and Ms S Johnstone. Ms K George did not attend and was not represented. The respondent, The Sanctuary Café NW6 Ltd, was represented by Ms C Evans, counsel.
The written judgment states only that the claim is dismissed. It records that reasons were given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the written record. No remedy, liability split, or separate findings by claim are set out in the written decision.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The written judgment records only that 'The claim is dismissed' and does not break the dismissal down by pleaded head of claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The written judgment records only that 'The claim is dismissed' and does not break the dismissal down by pleaded head of claim. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The written judgment records only that 'The claim is dismissed' and does not break the dismissal down by pleaded head of claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The written judgment records only that 'The claim is dismissed' and does not break the dismissal down by pleaded head of claim. | 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.