Case 1402913/2021 · Employment Tribunal
No appearance or v Mr S Morgan and Mr A Rohrer, Directors — 2022
- Case reference
- 1402913/2021
- Decision date
- 25 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leverton Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
No appearance or
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Miss R Hughes, brought a claim against Tiger Plant Ltd for unlawful deduction from wages under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The case was heard at Bristol by video hearing on 11 March 2022 before Employment Judge Leverton, with no appearance or representation for the claimant and Mr S Morgan and Mr A Rohrer appearing for the respondent as directors.
The tribunal’s judgment was that the claim failed and was dismissed. No monetary award was made, and the written record does not set out any separate remedy assessment because the only claim was not upheld.
The record also notes that the reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the note at the end of the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.