Case 1801434/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss G Bellwood v Accentia Corporate Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1801434/2023
- Decision date
- 15 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss G Bellwood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 13 March 2023. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, so Employment Judge JM Wade made a determination under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal declared that Accentia Corporate Limited had made unauthorised deductions from Miss G Bellwood's wages. Those deductions related to unpaid wages for December 2022 and January 2023 and unpaid contributions. The respondent was ordered to pay £2,129.15 net plus £300 for the deducted but unpaid contributions, making £2,429.15.
The claimant was permitted to amend the claim to include unpaid notice pay. The tribunal found that she had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £1,325.70. The awards together total £3,754.85.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages for unpaid wages for December 2022 and January 2023 and unpaid contributions, and ordered payment of £2,429.15 in total. | Upheld | — | £2,429 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The claimant was given permission to amend the claim to include unpaid notice pay; the tribunal found she had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £1,325.70 in damages. | Upheld | — | £1,326 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,755
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.