Case 1806312/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Furniss v Wilde-Eagle Group Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 1806312/2019
- Decision date
- 16 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Maidment Representation
- Venue
- Sheffield
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Furniss
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was determined on a Rule 21 basis. The claimant, Miss K Furniss, appeared in person and the respondent, Wilde-Eagle Group Ltd, did not attend and entered no appearance at the Sheffield hearing on 16 December 2019 before Employment Judge Maidment.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. In addition, it found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £560. | Upheld | — | £560 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £101.82. | Upheld | — | £102 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of the gross sum of £60.32. | Upheld | — | £60 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £722
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.