Case 1300485/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs K Adams v Aecus Recruitment Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1300485/2024
- Decision date
- 25 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Britton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs K Adams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment. The claim was issued in the Midlands West Employment Tribunals on 30 January 2024, and the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Britton therefore made a determination on the claim under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised pension deductions from the claimant's wages and had not paid those deductions to the pension administrator. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £341 gross in respect of that issue.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £1,440 gross for holiday pay. The judgment records a total sum payable to the claimant of £1,781.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised pension deductions from the claimant's wages and had not paid them to the pension administrator. | Upheld | — | £341 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £1,440 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,781
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.