Case 2204591/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss P Bodani v Link Consultancy Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2204591/2022
- Decision date
- 31 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss P Bodani
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge A M Snelson sat at London Central on 31 January 2023. The claimant, Miss P Bodani, appeared in person. The respondent, Link Consultancy Ltd, presented no response and played no part in the proceedings.
The tribunal determined that the claimant's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well-founded. It ordered the respondent to pay £10,010 in respect of that complaint. The judgment does not split the award into separate heads beyond that single sum.
The tribunal noted that the award was made as a gross figure. It said, on the basis of the claimant's evidence, that it was highly unlikely the respondent had accounted to the appropriate authorities for income tax and national insurance contributions that ought to have been paid on the claimant's salary during her employment from August 2021 to March 2022. It added that if that assumption were shown to be mistaken, it might reconsider the award with a view to substituting a net figure.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal ordered payment of £10,010 in respect of unauthorised deductions from wages. It recorded that the figure was treated as a gross sum, on the basis of the claimant's evidence that tax and national insurance had probably not been accounted for during her employment from August 2021 to March 2022. | Upheld | — | £10,010 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £10,010
- 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.