Case 2202184/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Quaium v Aspen Woolf Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2202184/2020
- Decision date
- 27 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Quaium
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London Central on 27 July 2020 before Employment Judge A M Snelson. The claimant, Mr S Quaium, did not appear and was not represented. The respondent, Aspen Woolf Ltd, was represented by Mr S Clark, Sales Director. The tribunal refused the respondent's application for an extension of time to present a response form.
On the merits, the tribunal held that the claimant's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well-founded and ordered the respondent to pay £863.00 in respect of that claim. The judgment does not give further detail on the underlying facts, but it records that the claimant's other claims were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £863 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records only that the claimant's other claims were dismissed; this claim type is inferred from the official case listing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The judgment records only that the claimant's other claims were dismissed; this claim type is inferred from the official case listing. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £863
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.