Case 1300746/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Andrews (1) v BAH Employment Limited and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 1300746/2021
- Decision date
- 22 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Britton Representation
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms J Andrews (1)
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a CVP hearing on 22 July 2021 before Employment Judge Britton, and with no attendance for the respondent, the tribunal held that BAH Employment Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £3,573.09. The tribunal also found that the respondent failed to pay the claimant in lieu of her entitlement to 21 days' annual leave and ordered £1,029.42.
The tribunal further found that the respondent failed to provide an up-dated statement of the written particulars of employment and ordered two weeks' pay in the sum of £490.20. The judgment states that the total amount payable is £4,918.34, although the three itemised amounts in the extracted text do not sum to that figure.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £3,573 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,029 |
| Other | The judgment awards two weeks' pay for failure to provide an up-dated statement of written particulars of employment. The extracted text does not identify a separate statutory label for this head of claim. The extracted text also states a total award that does not reconcile with the three itemised sums. | Upheld | — | £490 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,918
- 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.