Case 1308861/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss I Zile v Cube International Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation) — 2024
- Case reference
- 1308861/2023
- Decision date
- 28 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Broughton Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss I Zile
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 default judgment issued by Employment Judge Broughton on 28 June 2024. The respondent, Cube International Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation), did not present a Response within the relevant time limit, and the tribunal proceeded under Rule 21 of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £520.00. Pursuant to section 24(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal also awarded the claimant expenses of £212.17.
The total sum payable by the respondent to the claimant is £732.17. The judgment records that these are gross amounts and that the claimant is responsible for any income tax and National Insurance contributions arising on them.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 default judgment: respondent failed to present a Response within the relevant time limit. Gross sum awarded. | Upheld | — | £520 |
| Other | Expenses awarded under s.24(2) ERA 1996 alongside the unlawful deduction from wages finding. | Upheld | — | £212 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £732
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21, Schedule 1, Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- s.24(2) ERA 1996
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.