Case 1401650/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Collette Warren v 3tone Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 1401650/2024
- Decision date
- 2 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bax
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Collette Warren
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the South West Region Employment Tribunal on 8 April 2024. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Bax decided that the claim, or part of it, could properly be determined under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal held that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered the respondent to pay £8,871.33 gross. It also held that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £1,905.45 net.
The tribunal further held that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,153.84 gross. The respondent was ordered to pay £11,930.62 in total before deductions for tax and national insurance contributions.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records unauthorised deductions from wages and orders payment of £8,871.33 gross. | Upheld | — | £8,871 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice and orders damages of £1,905.45 net. | Upheld | — | £1,905 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment records failure to pay holiday entitlement and orders payment of £1,153.84 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,154 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £11,931
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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.