Case 6007057/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Cole v Foremost Care UK Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 6007057/2025
- Decision date
- 15 May 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dobbie Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Cole
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dismissed Ms Cole's claims of direct race discrimination and harassment related to race. It also dismissed her claims of whistleblowing automatic unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction from wages. The written judgment records that reasons were given orally on 7 May 2026 but does not set out the tribunal's factual findings or reasoning on those dismissed claims.
Ms Cole's holiday pay claim was upheld by consent for 10 days of holiday, in the agreed sum of £743.60 gross. Her wrongful dismissal claim for four weeks of contractual notice pay was also upheld, in the agreed sum of £1,784.64 gross.
Foremost Care UK Ltd was ordered to pay Ms Cole £2,528.24, comprising the two agreed gross payments. No award was recorded for the dismissed claims, and the judgment did not identify any interest or other remedy component.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The direct race discrimination claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | The harassment claims were related to race. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Whistleblowing | The whistleblowing automatic unfair dismissal claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The unlawful deduction from wages claims were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Upheld by consent for 10 days of holiday in the agreed gross sum of £743.60. | Upheld | — | £744 |
| Wrongful dismissal | Upheld for four weeks of contractual notice pay in the agreed gross sum of £1,784.64. | Upheld | — | £1,785 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,528
- 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.