Case 1806689/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Adoh v Hands-On Healthcare Recruitment Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 1806689/2022
- Decision date
- 20 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JM Wade
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Adoh
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Leeds Employment Tribunals on 19 December 2022. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge JM Wade determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On the papers, the tribunal declared that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages. It ordered the respondent to pay the net sum of £2,413.75 and also awarded £31.00 compensation for overdraft charges the claimant incurred because of those deductions.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £801.00 net in respect of that unpaid holiday entitlement. The total sum ordered by the tribunal was £3,245.75.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal declared that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £2,413.75. It also ordered £31.00 compensation for overdraft charges incurred because of those deductions. | Upheld | — | £2,445 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement and ordered payment of the net sum of £801.00. | Upheld | — | £801 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,246
- 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.