Case 2205006/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Mr S Murdoch — 2021
- Case reference
- 2205006/2020
- Decision date
- 5 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nicolle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not file an ET3 grounds of resistance. Employment Judge Nicolle therefore determined the claim on the papers under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, without a hearing.
On the ET1, the tribunal found that the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages to the claimant for the period from 25 March 2020 to 9 April 2020 in the gross sum of £3,245. The tribunal also found that the claimant was entitled to a net sum of £176.95 for unpaid taxi fares incurred for the purposes of her work with the respondent.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay unpaid wages and expenses totalling £3,421.95. It also noted that where wages are paid gross, the claimant will be responsible for applicable tax and employee national insurance contributions.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had unlawfully failed to pay wages for the period between 25 March 2020 and 9 April 2020; the sum stated was the gross amount. | Upheld | — | £3,245 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal also held the claimant was entitled to a net sum for unpaid taxi fares incurred for the purposes of her work with the respondent. | Upheld | — | £177 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,422
- 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.