Case 2200313/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Reynolds Technological Inquiries Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2200313/2020
- Decision date
- 7 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Adkin
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Jill Williamson brought a claim against Reynolds Technological Inquiries Limited for unlawful deduction from wages. The respondent did not file an ET3 Grounds of Resistance, and the Employment Judge decided the claim could properly be determined without a hearing under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
The tribunal held that the respondent had unlawfully deducted the claimant’s wages pursuant to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. In the reasons, the tribunal recorded that the respondent did not dispute the amounts owing. The award was therefore made on the basis of the papers before the tribunal.
The respondent was ordered to pay £13,303.08. The reasons state that this sum represented four months’ net monthly pay.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent did not file an ET3 Grounds of Resistance and did not dispute the amounts owing. The tribunal determined the claim on the papers under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 and found an unlawful deduction from wages under section 13 ERA 1996. | Upheld | — | £13,303 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,303
- 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.