Case 1400586/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs. F Honor v Trimpet Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1400586/2022
- Decision date
- 5 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lang Representation
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs. F Honor
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at Southampton before Employment Judge Lang. The claimant, Mrs F Honor, attended in person. The respondent did not attend. The tribunal found that the respondent had notice of the hearing, had been told that no postponement application had been made and that any such application would need supporting medical evidence, and that it was appropriate to proceed in the respondent’s absence under Rule 47.
On the merits, the tribunal held that the respondent had made an unlawful deduction from the claimant’s wages. It ordered payment of the gross amount owing, totalling £3,141.05. The judgment itemised that sum as £969.24 for 15-30 November 2021 inclusive, £1,833.33 for January 2022, and £338.48 for 1-4 February 2022 inclusive. Written reasons were not provided because reasons had been given orally at the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unlawful deduction from wages. The gross amount ordered was comprised of £969.24 for 15-30 November 2021, £1,833.33 for January 2022, and £338.48 for 1-4 February 2022. | Upheld | — | £3,141 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,141
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 47
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.