Case 1802942/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Y Kamal Drolia v Moors Burger Trading Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 1802942/2022
- Decision date
- 22 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Y Kamal Drolia
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunals on 2 September 2022. The respondent, Moors Burger Trading Ltd, failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Bright proceeded under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
In the resulting judgment dated 22 November 2022, the tribunal declared that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. The order required the respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £866.87.
No separate award breakdown was recorded in the judgment, and no other claims or remedies were set out in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal made a rule 21 judgment because the respondent did not present a valid response on time. It declared that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £866.87. | Upheld | — | £867 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £867
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.