Case 1304088/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Ms C Gilardenghi First v James Gardiner Second Respondent: Pure Recruitment Limited — 2017
- Case reference
- 1304088/2017
- Decision date
- 31 August 2017
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Britton Appearances
- Venue
- By CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms C Gilardenghi First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBoth respondents failed to attend or be represented at the hearing on 8 March 2022, which was conducted by CVP before Employment Judge Britton. The tribunal considered the information before it and heard evidence from the Claimant, Ms C Gilardenghi. It recorded that the Claimant was employed by the Second Respondent and dismissed the claim against the First Respondent.
On the wage claim, the tribunal found that the Second Respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the Claimant's wages by not paying the national minimum wage for hours worked in the month ending 31 August 2017. It ordered the Second Respondent to pay the Claimant £702.90. The notice pay claim was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the Second Respondent had made an unauthorised deduction by not paying the national minimum wage for hours worked in the month ending 31 August 2017. | Upheld | — | £703 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment refers only to a 'notice pay claim' and does not specify the legal basis beyond that description. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £703
- 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.