Case 1402886/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Ashplant v The Eat Good Club Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1402886/2021
- Decision date
- 7 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Ashplant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Bristol Employment Tribunals on 27 August 2021. The judgment records that the respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge decided that the claim could properly be determined 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. It ordered the respondent to pay £756 gross in respect of that claim.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £661.50 for that element. The judgment does not separate out any further components such as interest or other heads of remedy.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of £756 gross. | Upheld | — | £756 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £661.50. | Upheld | — | £662 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,418
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.