Case 1600551/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs A Davies v Osteotronix Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1600551/2020
- Decision date
- 2 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Brace Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs A Davies
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Mrs A Davies was dismissed by reason of redundancy on 27 October 2019. On that basis, it held that she was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment calculated at 2 years x £525, producing an award of £1,050.
The tribunal also found that Osteotronix Limited had deducted £2,776.92 from the claimant’s wages without her authorisation, in breach of section 13(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The total ordered to be paid to the claimant was £3,826.92, and the tribunal stated that she was responsible for any income tax or employee national insurance contributions due on the sums awarded at paragraph 2. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons were not provided.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal held that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy on 27 October 2019 and was therefore entitled to a statutory redundancy payment calculated at 2 years x £525. | Upheld | — | £1,050 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had deducted £2,776.92 from the claimant’s wages without her authorisation, in breach of section 13(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £2,777 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,827
- 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.