Case 3326433/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs G Coulson v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 3326433/2019
- Decision date
- 10 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Vowles
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mrs G Coulson
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal entered judgment under Rule 21 because the Respondent did not present a response. On that basis, it found that Mrs G Coulson had been unfairly dismissed and that her unfair dismissal complaint succeeded.
The tribunal also found that the Claimant was owed wages, recording this under the heading 'Unauthorised Deductions from Wages' and stating that the complaint succeeded. No monetary figure was fixed in this judgment.
Remedy was not determined at this stage. The tribunal said that the remedy to which the Claimant is entitled would be decided at a later remedy hearing, and directed her to provide a statement setting out the claim in monetary terms, details of mitigation, and current employment and earnings within 28 days.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Judgment entered under Rule 21 after the Respondent failed to enter a response. The tribunal stated that the Claimant was unfairly dismissed and that this complaint succeeded. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the Claimant was owed wages and that this complaint succeeded. The text uses the heading 'Unauthorised Deductions from Wages'. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.