Case 1310832/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Not present or represented — 2023
- Case reference
- 1310832/2022
- Decision date
- 8 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dimbylow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not attend and was not represented, and no response had been presented to the tribunal. Employment Judge Dimbylow gave judgment following a remote hearing at Birmingham on 8 August 2023.
The tribunal found the claimant's claim for unauthorised deduction from wages well-founded, declaring that the respondent failed to pay wages between 27 September 2022 and 16 November 2022. The tribunal ordered payment of £6,360.06 gross for that claim.
The tribunal also found well-founded the claimant's claim for compensation for unpaid travelling expenses and awarded £2,151.84 gross. It further found that the respondent failed to provide a written statement of employment particulars and awarded £2,284 gross, calculated as four weeks' pay capped at £571 per week.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the unauthorised deduction from wages claim well-founded and declared that the respondent failed to pay wages for the period from 27 September 2022 until 16 November 2022. | Upheld | — | £6,360 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal described this as compensation for the respondent's failure to pay travelling expenses; the judgment does not give further legal analysis beyond finding it well-founded. | Upheld | — | £2,152 |
| Other | The tribunal found that the respondent failed to provide a written statement of employment particulars and awarded four weeks' pay capped at £571 per week. | Upheld | — | £2,284 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,796
- 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.