Case 1405204/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms B Wake v Aquatic Chemicals Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 1405204/2023
- Decision date
- 8 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Emerton Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms B Wake
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Bristol Employment Tribunals on 20 September 2023. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. On that basis, the tribunal made findings on the papers rather than after a contested hearing.
The tribunal found that Aquatic Chemicals Ltd had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £233.40. It also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £817 in damages. A further finding was made that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement, with £166.67 awarded for that claim.
The judgment states that the respondent must pay the claimant £1,217.07 in total. No separate award components beyond the three sums identified in the judgment were recorded in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £233 |
| Breach of contract | Award was for notice pay after dismissal in breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £817 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal recorded failure to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £167 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,217
- 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.