Case 1805823/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Wilson v Eastman Staples Limited AT A HEARING — 2022
- Case reference
- 1805823/2021
- Decision date
- 18 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Wilson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing by CVP on 18 January 2022, Employment Judge Lancaster heard the claim in Leeds. Mrs Wilson attended in person. Eastman Staples Limited entered no appearance and did not attend.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from Mrs Wilson's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay £1,602.53 outstanding to her at the date of termination, 30 September 2021, described as salary owed in arrears for that month and accrued but untaken holiday entitlement.
The judgment records that the compensation was awarded net of tax (£144.80) and national insurance (£129.59), which had already been accounted for by the respondent to HMRC.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £1,602.53 outstanding at termination on 30 September 2021, described as salary arrears for that month and accrued but untaken holiday entitlement. The judgment also states that compensation was awarded net of tax (£144.80) and national insurance (£129.59), which had already been accounted for by the respondent to HMRC. | Upheld | — | £1,603 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,603
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,603
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.