Case 1400946/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Wills v Smiths of Bath Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1400946/2021
- Decision date
- 25 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bax Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Wills
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 9 November 2021 and the respondent did not present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge therefore determined the matter under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On the substance of the claim, the tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £2,000.02 gross. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £1,846.16 gross in damages.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £923.08 gross. The total monetary award recorded in the judgment was £4,769.26.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent was found to have made unauthorised deductions from wages; awarded gross sum of £2,000.02 under rule 21. | Upheld | — | £2,000 |
| Breach of contract | The claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice; awarded gross damages of £1,846.16. | Upheld | — | £1,846 |
| Holiday pay | The respondent failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement; awarded gross sum of £923.08. | Upheld | — | £923 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,769
- 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.