Case 1400436/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Higgins v Mcisla Recruitment Devon Limited and 2 others — 2023
- Case reference
- 1400436/2023
- Decision date
- 13 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge J Bax Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
4 namedClaimant
Ms E Higgins
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Bristol Employment Tribunal on 31 May 2023, before Employment Judge J Bax, the claimant appeared in person and the respondents did not attend and had not filed responses. The tribunal recorded that the claimant’s claim of breach of contract/unlawful deductions from wages against the First Respondent, in respect of her pension contributions, was well founded.
The tribunal ordered the First Respondent to pay the claimant £792.79. The judgment does not split that sum between different heads of loss or set out any separate interest or additional remedy components.
The complaints against the Second and Third Respondents were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment describes this as a combined breach of contract/unlawful deductions from wages claim in respect of pension contributions. The tribunal found it well founded and ordered the First Respondent to pay £792.79. The complaints against the Second and Third Respondents were dismissed. | Upheld | — | £793 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £793
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.