Case 1403168/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Vinton Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 1403168/2022
- Decision date
- 13 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cadney Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment because the respondent did not present a valid response on time. The tribunal proceeded to determine the claim on the papers. It upheld the unlawful deduction from wages claim and found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. The respondent was ordered to pay £1,678 gross.
The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. The tribunal found that the claimant did not have two years' continuous service and therefore the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear that claim. No separate remedy was awarded for unfair dismissal, and the only monetary figure recorded in the judgment was the £1,678 gross awarded on the wages claim.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,678 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,678 |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the claimant did not have two years' continuous service and that it therefore had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,678
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.