Case 1301259/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Nandra v Midlands Community Eyecare Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1301259/2022
- Decision date
- 2 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Perry
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Nandra
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy judgment under Rule 21, Employment Judge Perry found that Midlands Community Eyecare Limited had made an unlawful deduction from Miss A Nandra's wages within Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £6,000 gross in respect of that deduction.
The tribunal also declared that the respondent had failed to compensate the claimant for holiday leave that had accrued as at the termination of her employment under the Working Time Regulations 1998. It ordered payment of £375 gross, described in the judgment as 1.5 days' pay. The hearing listed for 20 September 2022 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment under Rule 21 found that the respondent made an unlawful deduction from the claimant's wages under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and ordered payment of £6,000 gross. | Upheld | — | £6,000 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment declared that the respondent failed to compensate the claimant for holiday leave accrued on termination under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and ordered £375 gross, stated to be 1.5 days' pay. | Upheld | — | £375 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,375
- 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.