Miss L Browning v Phoenix Staffing Ltd: 1303239/2023
JUDGMENT
The claim for discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation is struck out.REASONS
By a tetter dated 7th February 2024 the Tribunal gave the claimant an opportunity to make representations or to request a hearing, as to why the claim for discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation should not be struck out because the claimant had not complied with the order of the Tribunal dated 11th April 2023, 19th September 2023, and 28th October 2023 it has not been actively pursued.[2]The claimant has failed to make representations in writing, or has failed to make any sufficient representations, why this should not be done or to request a hearing. The claim for discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation is therefore struck out. The other claims remain extant. Employment Judge Faulkner Dated: 21st March 2024 6.2 Strike out Judgment claim - rule 37 Case Number: 1303239/2023 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Miss L Browning Respondent: Phoenix Staffing Ltd[1]The claim was issued in the Midlands West Employment Tribunals on 4 April 2023. The respondent has failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge has decided that a determination can properly be made of the claim, or part of it, in accordance with rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure.[2]The claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and the respondent must pay damages to the claimant of £1602.50.[3]The respondent has failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and must pay the claimant £259.61.[4]The respondent must pay the claimant £1862.11 in total.[5]The sum payable above is the gross amount to be paid and the respondent is responsible for deductions of any income tax and National Insurance contributions thereon. Employment Judge Smart 29 November 2024 Case No: 1303239/2023 10.8 Reasons – rule 62(3) March 2017 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Lauralee Browning Respondent: Phoenix Staffing Ltd Heard at: Midlands West On: 18 June 2025 Before: Employment Judge J Connolly Representation Claimants: In person Respondents: No attendance[1]The complaint in respect of holiday pay is well-founded. The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages by failing to pay the claimant for holidays accrued but not taken on the date the claimant’s employment ended.[2]The respondent shall pay the claimant £360.58 in respect of unpaid holiday pay. The claimant is responsible for paying any tax or National Insurance. Notice Pay[3]The complaint of breach of contract by the respondent in relation to notice pay is well-founded.[4]The respondent shall pay the claimant £1,730.70 as damages for breach of contract. This figure has been calculated using gross pay to reflect the likelihood that the claimant may have to pay tax on it as Post Employment Notice Pay. Case No: 1301295/2017 10.8 Reasons – rule 62(3) March 2017 Total[5]The total sum payable to the claimant is £2,091.28 Recoupment[6]The Recoupment Regulations do not apply. Approved By: Employment Judge Connolly On: 18 June 2025 Note Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing. Written reasons will not be provided unless a party asked for them at the hearing or a party makes a written request within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision.