Case 1801297/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Cook v Knowles Benning LLP — 2023
- Case reference
- 1801297/2023
- Decision date
- 26 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Cook
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was determined under rule 21 because the respondent failed to present a valid response in time. Employment Judge D N Jones was satisfied that a determination could properly be made on the papers. The judgment records no hearing evidence or wider findings beyond the specific heads of claim set out in the decision.
The tribunal declared that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages in relation to unpaid wages for November and December 2022 and ordered payment of the net sum of £2,868.00. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of the gross sum of £1,700.00.
The tribunal further found two breaches of contract. First, the respondent had deducted pension contributions from the claimant's wages but had not paid them into the pension, and damages of £535.00 were awarded. Second, the respondent failed to reimburse agreed expenses, and damages of £906.00 were awarded. The total monetary award recorded by the judgment is £6,009.00.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unpaid wages for November and December 2022; award stated as net sum. | Upheld | — | £2,868 |
| Holiday pay | Failure to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement; award stated as gross sum. | Upheld | — | £1,700 |
| Breach of contract | Deducted pension contributions were not paid into the claimant's pension. | Upheld | — | £535 |
| Breach of contract | Failure to reimburse agreed expenses. | Upheld | — | £906 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,009
- 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.