Case 1801208/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Sunderland v Cherry Tree Farm (Skipton) LLP — 2020
- Case reference
- 1801208/2020
- Decision date
- 31 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brain Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Sunderland
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn this Rule 21 judgment dated 31 March 2020, Employment Judge Brain found that Cherry Tree Farm (Skipton) LLP had made an unlawful deduction from Mrs S Sunderland's wages. The tribunal fixed the amount of the deduction at £680 gross.
The judgment also recorded that, under section 24(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, it was just and equitable to award an additional £35 compensation for credit card charges incurred by the claimant because of the unlawful deduction. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £715 on or before 14 April 2020.
The claimant's separate claim for loss of earnings between the end of her employment and the start of her new employment was dismissed, because the tribunal said there was no apparent legal basis for such an award. The hearing listed for 20 April 2020 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unlawful deduction from wages of £680 gross. It also awarded £35 compensation under section 24(2) ERA 1996 for credit card charges caused by the deduction. The claimant's claim for loss of earnings between the end of employment and the start of new employment was dismissed for lack of a legal basis. | Upheld | — | £715 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £715
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £35
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 24(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
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.