Case 1600857/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Smith v Modfix Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 1600857/2019
- Decision date
- 24 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ward Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in which the tribunal held that the claim succeeded. It found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £253.50.
The tribunal also held that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £1,405.38. In the same judgment, it found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £1,755.00.
The judgment does not set out any disputed facts or legal analysis beyond those remedies. It records a total award of £3,413.88 made up of the three sums ordered.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal ordered payment of the gross/net sum of £253.50 for an unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £254 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £1,405.38. | Upheld | — | £1,405 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded a redundancy payment of £1,755.00. | Upheld | — | £1,755 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,414
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.