Case 2201194/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v My Life Kit Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2201194/2023
- Decision date
- 17 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London Central by CVP on 16 May 2023 before Employment Judge A M Buchanan sitting alone. The respondent, amended to My Life Kit Ltd, did not attend and entered no response. The judgment records that the complaint in respect of unauthorised deduction from wages was well-founded, covering unpaid wages due for the claimant's employment from 24 February 2022 until 31 December 2022.
The tribunal also found that the complaint in respect of unpaid holiday pay was well-founded, and it awarded £8,052.10 forthwith. In addition, the breach of contract complaint in respect of unpaid holiday pay was well-founded, and the tribunal awarded £18,125.00 forthwith.
The sums in paragraphs 2 to 4 were stated to be gross payments, with the claimant required to account to the appropriate authorities for income tax and employee national insurance contributions due on receipt. The total sum due from the respondent was £88,080.90, payable forthwith.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the complaint well-founded and ordered payment of unpaid wages for the period of employment from 24 February 2022 until 31 December 2022. | Upheld | — | £61,904 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the complaint well-founded and ordered payment of unpaid holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £8,052 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the breach of contract complaint well-founded in respect of unpaid holiday pay. | Upheld | — | £18,125 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £88,081
- 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.