Case 1803304/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Simpson v The Hound Ville Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 1803304/2023
- Decision date
- 2 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Simpson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunals on 29 June 2023. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge made a determination under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment also records that The Hound Ville Limited was substituted as respondent under Tribunal Rule 34.
The tribunal declared that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages in relation to unpaid wages and unpaid accrued holiday pay. The award was stated as the net sum of £506.91, after deducting £24 owed by the claimant.
The hearing listed for 24 August 2023 was cancelled after the rule 21 judgment was issued. No separate remedy components were identified beyond the single net sum ordered.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states the tribunal declared unauthorised deductions from wages in relation to unpaid wages and unpaid accrued holiday pay, with £24 owed by the claimant deducted to reach the net sum ordered. No separate claim label was given for holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £507 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £507
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21, Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Tribunal Rule 34
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.