Case 1804162/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Jonathan Coles-Reeves v Steve Rooms (Huby Domestic) — 2022
- Case reference
- 1804162/2022
- Decision date
- 12 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bright
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Jonathan Coles-Reeves
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunals on 4 August 2022. The respondent, Steve Rooms (Huby Domestic), did not present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Bright therefore determined the claim under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 without a contested hearing.
The tribunal declared that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. The deductions identified were 1 month's wages for May 2022, for which the tribunal ordered payment of the net sum of £1,934.05, and pension contributions, for which the tribunal ordered payment of £99.94.
The listed hearing on 27 October 2022 was cancelled. No separate remedy heads were identified beyond the two sums ordered in respect of the unauthorised deductions.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal determined the claim under Rule 21 because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. It declared unauthorised deductions from wages for May 2022 (£1,934.05 net) and for pension contributions (£99.94). | Upheld | — | £2,034 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,034
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21
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.