Case 1400967/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms F Harrison v Shire Oak Energy Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1400967/2023
- Decision date
- 7 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms F Harrison
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented on 7 March 2023. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge made a rule 21 determination on the papers. On that basis, the tribunal recorded that the claimant had suffered an unlawful deduction from pay because wages were not paid from 1 June 2022 to 31 December 2022, and that the claimant had been wrongfully dismissed and was entitled to notice pay.
The tribunal ordered payment of £7,633.00 gross for unpaid wages and £603.37 net for one week's notice pay. The judgment does not separate those sums into basic award, compensatory award, or any other remedy component. It then stated that all other claims were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unlawful deduction from pay in respect of a failure to pay wages from 1 June 2022 to 31 December 2022. The award was stated as £7,633.00 gross. | Upheld | — | £7,633 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found that the claimant had been wrongfully dismissed and was entitled to one week's notice pay. The award was stated as £603.37 net. | Upheld | — | £603 |
| Other | The judgment states that all other claims are dismissed, but it does not specify the remaining claim type(s) in the extracted text. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,236
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.