Case 1303196/2022 · Employment Tribunal
not in attendance For the v Central Heating Hub Ltd (in Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 1303196/2022
- Decision date
- 16 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kenward
Parties
2 namedClaimant
not in attendance For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought an unlawful deduction from wages claim concerning a £600 deduction made in respect of vehicle damage. The case had already been managed at a preliminary hearing, where the claimant accepted that there had been damage to a work van and did not dispute that he was responsible for the cost of the necessary repair or that the respondent was, in principle, entitled to deduct that cost from his wages. His position was that the repair should have cost no more than £150, so that £450 was said to be unauthorised.
By the time of the final hearing on 3 August 2023, the respondent was in creditors’ voluntary liquidation and did not appear. The claimant also did not attend. The tribunal clerk contacted him by telephone and he said he was at work, had not been aware of the hearing, and was no longer pursuing the matter.
The tribunal noted that the claimant had not filed a witness statement and had not replied to the email seeking an electronic bundle for the hearing. In those circumstances, and because the claim had not been pursued since the preliminary hearing and the claimant had said he was no longer pursuing it, the tribunal dismissed the claim under rule 47 for non-attendance and under rule 52 on the basis that it had been withdrawn.
No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant sought recovery of a £600 deduction from wages for vehicle damage. At the preliminary hearing he accepted that there had been damage to a work van and did not dispute that he was responsible for the repair cost or that the respondent was, in principle, entitled to deduct that cost. He said the repair should have cost no more than £150, leaving £450 as the disputed deduction. The final hearing proceeded in his absence, and he later told the tribunal clerk that he was no longer pursuing the matter. The tribunal dismissed the claim under rules 47 and 52, referring both to non-attendance and to withdrawal. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.