Case 2206642/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss P Dubrowska v JK Advice Centre Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2206642/2021
- Decision date
- 7 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wisby
- Venue
- London Central via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss P Dubrowska
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Wisby sat alone at London Central via CVP on 6 January 2022 and gave oral reasons, with the written record sent to the parties on 7 January 2022. The Tribunal found that JK Advice Centre Ltd had failed to provide Miss P Dubrowska with a written statement of particulars under section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and ordered the Respondent to pay £445.50, described as two weeks' pay, in respect of that failure.
The Tribunal also found that the Respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages in the sum of £122.96 in respect of accrued but untaken annual leave. It declared that amount due to the Claimant and ordered payment of £122.96 gross, subject to required statutory deductions. The total monetary award recorded by the judgment is £568.46.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Failure to provide the Claimant with a written statement of particulars under section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996; the Tribunal ordered payment of two weeks' pay. | Upheld | — | £446 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal declared that the Respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of accrued but untaken annual leave and ordered payment of the gross sum, subject to required statutory deductions. | Upheld | — | £123 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £568
- 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.