Case 2206322/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss B Valiente v Club Chef Du Jour Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2206322/2021
- Decision date
- 20 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Connolly Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss B Valiente
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Respondent did not attend the 29 November 2021 hearing and had not provided a response form. The Tribunal proceeded under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules 2013 after considering the ET1 and the background, and determined the claim without a further hearing.
The Tribunal found that the Respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the Claimant’s wages in relation to the period from 1 June 2021 to 23 August 2021. It ordered the Respondent to pay the Claimant the gross sum of £3,000, described in the judgment as the amount unlawfully deducted. The judgment also records that the Respondent was entitled to make deductions for income tax and national insurance as required by law.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Determined under Rule 21 after the Respondent did not attend the hearing and had not presented a response form. The Tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages for the period 1 June 2021 to 23 August 2021 and ordered payment of the gross sum of £3,000, subject to deductions for income tax and national insurance as required by law. | Upheld | — | £3,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,000
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules 2013
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.