Case 1304014/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Gibson v UK Career Academy Limited ta The Career Academy — 2019
- Case reference
- 1304014/2018
- Decision date
- 22 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cookson Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Gibson
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Birmingham Employment Tribunal, Employment Judge Cookson found that UK Career Academy Limited t/a The Career Academy breached Miss A Gibson's contract of employment and made unlawful deductions from wages totalling £5,004.76 contrary to s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996. The judgment records that the sum was made up of £2,620.15 deducted in July 2018 in respect of visa-related costs, the cost of a flight to the UK, the value of Australian flights and an Apple Watch, together with £2,384.61 representing an agreed payment in lieu of notice that should have been paid in August 2018.
The tribunal ordered that £5,004.76 was payable by the respondent to the claimant. The claimant's claims relating to unpaid commission were recorded as withdrawn and dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the respondent breached the claimant's contract of employment. The monetary award was not split between claims. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unlawful deductions from wages contrary to s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996. The monetary award was not split between claims. | Upheld | — | — |
| Other | The claimant's claims relating to unpaid commission were recorded as withdrawn and dismissed. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,005
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.