Case 1308985/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Labinska and Mrs Rynkar v Churchill Contract Services — 2021
- Case reference
- 1308985/2019
- Decision date
- 22 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cookson Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Labinska and Mrs Rynkar
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Birmingham Employment Tribunal, Employment Judge Cookson issued a judgment by consent on 22 January 2021 after hearings on 21 and 22 January 2021. The respondent accepted that there had been unlawful deductions from the wages of Mrs Rynkar and Ms Labinska, with an interpreter provided for the Polish-speaking claimants.
For Mrs Rynkar, the judgment records that after offsetting overpayments the amount due from the respondent was £633.24, and the parties accepted that sum as owed. For Ms Labinska, the judgment records unlawful deductions and overpayments, and states that the amount was reduced to £286.05. The decision does not record any contested findings beyond those agreed amounts, and no additional remedies, legal tests, or separate claims are identified in the text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment by consent; the respondent accepted unlawful deductions from Mrs Rynkar's wages and the parties agreed that, after offsetting overpayments, £633.24 was owed. | Upheld | — | £633 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment by consent; the respondent accepted unlawful deductions from Ms Labinska's wages. The text says the 'net overpayment' was reduced to £286.05; extracted here as the agreed net amount associated with that claim. | Upheld | — | £286 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £919
- 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.