Case 1307755/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Sprague v Wags Of Worcester Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1307755/2023
- Decision date
- 26 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Flood
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Sprague
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Midlands West Employment Tribunals on 3 November 2023. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the claimant's claim for unauthorised deduction from wages was well founded. It found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages between 29 August 2023 and 8 September 2023.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £604.36 gross. The listed hearing on 22 March was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment. The respondent did not present a valid response on time. The tribunal found the claimant's claim for unauthorised deduction from wages well founded and ordered payment of £604.36 gross for deductions between 29 August 2023 and 8 September 2023. | Upheld | — | £604 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £604
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.