Case 1403960/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Williams v The Magic Bean Co Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 1403960/2018
- Decision date
- 7 January 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R. Harper MBE
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Williams
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment. The tribunal recorded that the Respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the Claimant's wages and ordered the Respondent to pay £2,695.53. The same judgment also ordered the Respondent to pay a bonus of £1,450.00.
The extracted text does not set out any further factual findings, reasons, or dispute on liability, and it does not identify a separate legal analysis for the bonus order. The hearing listed for 25 January 2019 was cancelled following the judgment. The total monetary outcome recorded by the judgment is £4,145.53.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the Respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages and orders payment of £2,695.53. | Upheld | — | £2,696 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment separately orders the Respondent to pay a bonus of £1,450.00. The extracted text does not state the underlying contractual basis, but this appears to be the separate monetary award recorded in the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,450 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,146
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.