Case 3334474/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs H Jackson v Darsdale Carehome Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3334474/2018
- Decision date
- 11 April 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Foxwell
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs H Jackson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a response within the time allowed. Employment Judge Foxwell therefore made a Rule 21 judgment in favour of Mrs H Jackson and declared the claims for unpaid wages, notice pay, and disability discrimination to be well-founded.
The judgment did not determine remedy. It recorded that any award due to the claimant would be decided at a separate Remedy Hearing listed for 7 June 2019 at Cambridge County Court, with two hours allocated.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the claim for unpaid wages was declared well-founded under Rule 21. No remedy amount was determined in this decision. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claim for notice pay was declared well-founded under Rule 21. No remedy amount was determined in this decision. | Upheld | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the disability discrimination claim was declared well-founded under Rule 21. No remedy amount was determined in this decision. | Upheld | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.