Case 1801976/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Woollias v White Mansion Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1801976/2022
- Decision date
- 14 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Woollias
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunals on 22 April 2022. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The hearing listed for 4 July 2022 was cancelled.
The tribunal declared that White Mansion Ltd had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. Those deductions related to 5 days' wages for October 2021, assessed at £692.07 gross, and unpaid wages for February 2022, assessed at £500.00 gross. The tribunal ordered payment of those sums to the claimant.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £1,384.15. No discrimination, dismissal fairness, or other remedy issues were recorded in the judgment beyond the wage and notice findings.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of 5 days' wages for October 2021 (£692.07) and unpaid wages for February 2022 (£500.00). | Upheld | — | £1,192 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £1,384.15. | Upheld | — | £1,384 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,576
- 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.