Case 1405541/2023 · Employment Tribunal
in person, joined by Telephone For the v Mr S Robillard, Solicitor, by CVP — 2024
- Case reference
- 1405541/2023
- Decision date
- 13 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Rayner Appearances
- Venue
- Southampton
Parties
2 namedClaimant
in person, joined by Telephone For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that the respondent had made an unlawful deduction from the claimant's wages in the sum of £2,393.39, contrary to section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996. The respondent was ordered to pay that sum to the claimant.
The judgment also recorded an employer's contract claim. The respondent's claim for damages for breach of contract was dismissed in its entirety. Written reasons were not provided because reasons were given orally at the hearing, subject to any timely request.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states the respondent made an unlawful deduction from wages contrary to section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £2,393 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment describes this as the respondent's claim for damages for breach of contract and dismisses it in its entirety. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,393
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.