Case 1307032/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Wilcox (family member) For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 1307032/2019
- Decision date
- 19 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hughes
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mrs Wilcox (family member) For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the second respondent, DLM Building & Maintenance Ltd, was the claimant's employer at the material time and the correct respondent to the proceedings. It upheld the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of accrued annual leave and ordered the second respondent to pay the agreed net sum of £691.04.
The tribunal also upheld the claim for constructive unfair dismissal. It ordered the second respondent to pay £14,607.60 net in compensation, which the judgment said comprised a basic award of £3,600.00, loss of statutory rights of £500.00, and wage loss for the period 29 April 2019 to 31 October 2019 of £10,507.60 net. The tribunal recorded that the recoupment regulations did not apply.
The total sum payable to the claimant by the second respondent was £15,298.64.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim related to accrued annual leave. The tribunal ordered the second respondent to pay the agreed net sum of £691.04. | Upheld | — | £691 |
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal held the constructive unfair dismissal claim well-founded. It awarded compensation of £14,607.60 net, comprising a basic award of £3,600.00, loss of statutory rights of £500.00 and wage loss for 29 April 2019 to 31 October 2019 of £10,507.60 net. The recoupment regulations did not apply. | Upheld | — | £14,608 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £15,299
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,600
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £11,008
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.