Case 1305144/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Biel v Charlie's Restaurant Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1305144/2020
- Decision date
- 16 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Biel
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal found that Charlie's Restaurant Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from Ms E Biel's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay £1,701.00, described in the judgment as the gross/net sum for that deduction.
The tribunal also found that Ms Biel was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It ordered the respondent to pay damages of £360.00 for that breach.
Ms Biel's complaint for accrued holiday entitlement did not succeed and was dismissed. The judgment records no separate apportionment of the monetary awards beyond the two sums ordered, so the overall award is £2,061.00.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross/net sum of £1,701.00. | Upheld | — | £1,701 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £360.00. | Upheld | — | £360 |
| Holiday pay | The complaint for accrued holiday entitlement did not succeed and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,061
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.