Case 1600259/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms H Chaudhry-Green v Home Office Shared Services — 2021
- Case reference
- 1600259/2021
- Decision date
- 23 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Harfield Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms H Chaudhry-Green
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy consent, Employment Judge R Harfield recorded that the claimant's complaint of an unauthorised deduction from wages, based on the respondent's failure to pay her performance bonus when due, was well founded and upheld. The judgment also records that the claimant's complaint that the respondent failed to pay accrued holiday pay on termination was well founded and upheld.
The tribunal made no award of compensation because the sums due had already been repaid to the claimant. The judgment notes that the issue of costs was to be dealt with in a separate judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | By consent. The complaint concerned non-payment of the claimant's performance bonus when due. No award of compensation was made because the sums due had already been repaid to the claimant. | Upheld | — | — |
| Holiday pay | By consent. The complaint concerned non-payment of accrued holiday pay on termination. No award of compensation was made because the sums due had already been repaid to the claimant. | Upheld | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.