Case 1600411/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss R Jones v Advanced Esthetics Solutions Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1600411/2024
- Decision date
- 29 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss R Jones
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Wales Employment Tribunals on 5 February 2024 against Advanced Esthetics Solutions Ltd (In Voluntary Liquidation). The Respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The listed hearing on 7 May 2024 was cancelled.
The tribunal found that the Respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the Claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £865.38 gross. It also found that the Respondent had failed to pay the Claimant’s car allowance for 1 to 14 December 2023 and ordered payment of £225.80.
The tribunal further found that the Claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £856.38. The judgment records a total payment of £1,956.56 and states that the Claimant is responsible for any income tax and employee national insurance due.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment separately orders £865.38 gross for unauthorised deductions from wages and £225.80 for unpaid car allowance for 1-14 December 2023. | Upheld | — | £1,091 |
| Breach of contract | Damages were awarded for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £856 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,957
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.