Case 1306060/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Beckford v Guardian Homes (Midlands) Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1306060/2019
- Decision date
- 7 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Perry
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Beckford
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment before Employment Judge Perry in which the tribunal determined two monetary claims in the claimant's favour. First, it found that Guardian Homes (Midlands) Ltd had made an unlawful deduction from Ms A Beckford's wages within Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and ordered the respondent to pay £865.75 gross.
Second, the tribunal declared that the respondent had failed to compensate Ms Beckford for holiday leave that had accrued as at the termination of her employment under the Working Time Regulations 1998. It ordered payment of £600 gross in respect of that accrued leave entitlement. The judgment records no separate liability findings beyond those two orders and does not set out any additional remedy components.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent made an unlawful deduction from the claimant's wages pursuant to Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and ordered payment of £865.75 gross. | Upheld | — | £866 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal declared that the respondent failed to compensate the claimant in relation to holiday leave accrued as at termination of employment under the Working Time Regulations 1998 and ordered payment of £600 gross. | Upheld | — | £600 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,466
- 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.