Case 3327360/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Burke v Fulbridge Social Care Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3327360/2017
- Decision date
- 6 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Porter Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Burke
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs A Burke brought claims against Fulbridge Social Care Limited for mileage expenses and holiday pay. The case was heard at Manchester on 1 August 2019 before Employment Judge Porter, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by its HR Manager. The tribunal recorded that the mileage expenses claim was not well-founded and dismissed it.
The holiday pay claim succeeded in part only. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £85.75 gross. The judgment does not set out a separate breakdown of any additional award components, and no other monetary remedy is recorded in the decision. Written reasons were not provided because reasons were given orally at the hearing and no request for written reasons appears in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim for mileage expenses was found not well-founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for holiday pay succeeded in part only, and the respondent was ordered to pay £85.75 gross. | Upheld | — | £86 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £86
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.