Case 1801157/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Daniel v Doing More Print Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1801157/2024
- Decision date
- 18 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Daniel
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunals on 19 February 2024. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Bright determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On the papers, the tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £2,426.67.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £7,560.00. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £303.97 gross. The total monetary award on the judgment is £10,290.64.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of the gross amount stated in the judgment. | Upheld | — | £2,427 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and entitled to a redundancy payment in the amount stated in the judgment. | Upheld | — | £7,560 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of the gross amount stated in the judgment. | Upheld | — | £304 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,291
- 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.