Vol. I·6 May 2026

Search the index

Loading…

Loading page content.

Tribunal Watch

A structured, cross-cut index of UK employment tribunal decisions, built from the primary record at gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions. Independent of HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice.

Not legal advice. Information on this site is a matter of public record; it is not guidance on any individual case.

Editorial

About this site
Methodology
Corrections policy
Editorial standards

Rights & privacy

Open Government Licence v3.0
Privacy notice
Data subject requests
Atom feed (recent decisions)

Tribunal Watch/Mojo Coffee Lewes Road Limited (in liquidation) Second Respondent: The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy/6014698/2025

Case 6014698/2025 · Employment Tribunal

Annette Fowler First v Mojo Coffee Lewes Road Limited (in liquidation) Second Respondent: The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy — 2025

Case reference: 6014698/2025
Decision date: 12 March 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Lumby REPRESENTATION

Indexed: 25 April 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Annette Fowler First

Respondent

Mojo Coffee Lewes Road Limited (in liquidation) Second Respondent: The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

Claims brought

1 category

Redundancy

Source tags (gov.uk)

Redundancy

Outcomes per claim are extracted in a second pass and are not yet published on this page.

Source document

Primary record

The full judgment is available on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Judgment 1 (PDF)

Annette Fowler First v Mojo Coffee Lewes Road Limited (in liquidation) Second Respondent: The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy — Employment Tribunal 2025 | Tribunal Watch

↗

Judgment 2 (PDF) ↗

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.