Case 1401412/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Amboorallee v Mons Catering — 2023
- Case reference
- 1401412/2023
- Decision date
- 14 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Representation
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Amboorallee
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Rayner, sitting in Southampton on 25 August 2023, declared that Mons Catering had made an unlawful deduction from Mr S Amboorallee's wages in the sum of £484.50. The judgment also recorded that the Claimant had incurred £5.00 petrol costs and ordered reimbursement of that amount.
The tribunal dismissed the Claimant's separate claim for £2,000.00 compensation for emotional distress. It also made a preparation time order, awarding £86.00 for two hours' preparation at £43.00 per hour reasonably carried out by the Claimant for the hearing.
The total amount payable to the Claimant was recorded as £575.50, made up of £484.50 unpaid wages, £5.00 petrol expenses, and £86.00 preparation time.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal declared that the Respondent had made an unlawful deduction from the Claimant's wages in the sum of £484.50. The same judgment also ordered reimbursement of £5.00 petrol expenses and £86.00 preparation time, but those were not separated as distinct claim awards. | Upheld | — | £485 |
| Other | The Claimant's claim for £2,000.00 compensation for emotional distress was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £576
- 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.