Case 1800191/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Sykes v Multiclean Supplies Ltd & Others — 2020
- Case reference
- 1800191/2020
- Decision date
- 2 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brain
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Sykes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued under the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The claimant was Ms A Sykes and the respondent was Multiclean Supplies Ltd & Others. Employment Judge Brain recorded that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £1,400 for work undertaken by the claimant in October 2019 and the first week of November 2019.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £105. The judgment directed that the total sum of £1,505 be paid to the claimant on or before 16 November 2020. No other claims, reasons, or separate remedy components were recorded in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal ordered payment of the gross sum of £1,400 for work undertaken in October 2019 and the first week of November 2019. | Upheld | — | £1,400 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £105. | Upheld | — | £105 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,505
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.