Case 6012048/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Rachel Carter v Chelmsford Hair Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6012048/2025
- Decision date
- 12 September 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A.M.S. Green
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Rachel Carter
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningRachel Carter's complaint of unfair dismissal against Chelmsford Hair Ltd was upheld. The tribunal awarded a basic award of £637.50 and a compensatory award of £2,663, and recorded that the compensatory award was the figure payable after applying the adjustments it identified under the ACAS Code provisions.
The tribunal found that the respondent unreasonably failed to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015, so the compensatory award was increased by 25%. It also found that the claimant unreasonably failed to appeal the dismissal decision, which justified a 10% reduction, and that the claimant caused or contributed to the dismissal by blameworthy conduct, which justified a further 25% reduction.
The tribunal recorded that there was no prescribed element under the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 because there was no award for immediate loss of earnings, so the whole award was payable to the claimant. It also found that, when the proceedings began, the respondent was in breach of its duty to provide written particulars of employment. In respect of that breach, it found no exceptional circumstances making a two weeks' gross pay award unjust or inequitable, declined to award four weeks' gross pay, and ordered payment of £255 under section 38 Employment Act 2002.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the complaint of unfair dismissal well-founded. It awarded a basic award of £637.50 and a compensatory award of £2,663, and recorded that the compensatory award was affected by a 25% increase for the respondent's unreasonable failure to comply with the ACAS Code, a 10% reduction for the claimant's failure to appeal, and a further 25% reduction for contributory conduct. | Upheld | — | £3,301 |
| Other | The tribunal found that when proceedings were begun the respondent was in breach of its duty to provide the claimant with written particulars of employment. It found no exceptional circumstances making an award equal to two weeks' gross pay unjust or inequitable, and made an award of £255 under section 38 Employment Act 2002, rather than four weeks' gross pay. | Upheld | — | £255 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,556
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £638
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £2,663
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
4 references- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures 2015
- s.207A Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
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.