Case 1401925/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms H Sanders v Managing Partners Services Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 1401925/2025
- Decision date
- 18 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms H Sanders
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Gray determined the claim under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The judge found unauthorised deductions from wages, breach of contract in respect of notice, redundancy, unpaid holiday entitlement, and unpaid pension contributions.
The respondent was ordered to pay £24,255 gross for unauthorised deductions, £6,540 damages for notice, £6,650 as a redundancy payment, £1,595 for holiday pay, and £634.08 for unpaid pension contributions, giving a total award of £39,674.08.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 22 default judgment; gross. | Upheld | — | £24,255 |
| Breach of contract | Damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £6,540 |
| Redundancy | Claimant dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £6,650 |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £1,595 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Failure to pay pension contributions; the tribunal directed payment to the claimant. | Upheld | — | £634 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £39,674
- 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.