Case 1600904/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Mr Mills (Manager) — 2019
- Case reference
- 1600904/2019
- Decision date
- 25 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge W Beard Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr L Breen, brought claims against M & J Woods (SW) Limited for breach of contract and unlawful deduction from wages. The judgment, sent to the parties on 25 October 2019, was given by Employment Judge W Beard sitting alone at Swansea on 21 October 2019. No lay members are listed.
The breach of contract claim was framed as a failure to pay notice pay. The tribunal found that claim was not well founded and dismissed it.
The unlawful deduction of wages claim succeeded to the extent of £639.26. The tribunal also recorded that the respondent had already paid the claimant that sum, and therefore made no further order. The judgment does not identify any additional remedy beyond that payment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim was for failure to pay notice pay. The tribunal found it was not well founded and dismissed it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claim well founded to the extent of £639.26, but recorded that the respondent had already paid that sum, so no further order was made. | Upheld | — | £639 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £639
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.