Case 1804399/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D King v Clarico Recruitment Group — 2022
- Case reference
- 1804399/2021
- Decision date
- 8 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D King
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunals on 1 September 2021. The respondent, Clarico Recruitment Ltd (In Administration), failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge therefore determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On that basis, the tribunal upheld the claimant's claim for unauthorised deductions from wages. It found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered it to pay £380 gross.
The tribunal also upheld the claim relating to holiday entitlement. It found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £840 gross. The total sum awarded was £1,220 gross.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of £380 gross. | Upheld | — | £380 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £840 gross. | Upheld | — | £840 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,220
- 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.