Case 2204874/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms D Ashrafi v Westconnect Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2204874/2022
- Decision date
- 30 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Connolly Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms D Ashrafi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 30 September 2022 at London Central, before Employment Judge S Connolly, the tribunal recorded that the correct name of the respondent was Westconnect Limited. The respondent did not attend. The tribunal then held that Westconnect Limited had made an unlawful deduction from Ms D Ashrafi's wages.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay Ms Ashrafi £450.46, described in the judgment as the gross sum deducted. It also recorded that the respondent is entitled to make deductions for tax and national insurance before payment if applicable. The extracted judgment states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unlawful deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum deducted, £450.46. The extracted judgment gives no further written reasons beyond the oral judgment recorded at the hearing. | Upheld | — | £450 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £450
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.