Case 1303032/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr H Eaton v Fletchers Business Solutions Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1303032/2022
- Decision date
- 4 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Flood Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr H Eaton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment records that the claim was issued in the Employment Tribunals on 21 June 2022 and that the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The judgment does not set out the underlying factual basis of the claim, but the GOV.UK listing identifies it as an unlawful deduction from wages claim. On that basis, the claim is recorded as upheld. The judgment states that the respondent must pay the claimant £2,006.16 gross in total.
No separate remedy breakdown is given, and the judgment does not identify any other claims, legal tests, or findings beyond the Rule 21 default judgment and the total amount awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal entered a Rule 21 judgment because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The judgment states that the respondent must pay the claimant £2,006.16 gross in total, but does not set out any itemised breakdown. | Upheld | — | £2,006 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,006
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.