Case 2207373/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Boulting v Fact Administration LLP — 2023
- Case reference
- 2207373/2023
- Decision date
- 6 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Singh Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Boulting
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at London Central by CVP on 5 and 6 September 2023 before Employment Judge Singh. On the face of the extracted judgment, the only claim that succeeded was the claim for unlawful deduction from wages, and the tribunal awarded Mr T Boulting £2,825.59.
The claimant's breach of contract claim in respect of unpaid expenses was not successful, and his separate claim for contract notice pay was also not successful. The unfair dismissal claim was struck out. The extracted text records these outcomes and the award, but it does not set out further written reasons or any split of the monetary award between heads of claim.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal awarded the claimant the sum of £2,825.59. | Upheld | — | £2,826 |
| Breach of contract | Claim in respect of unpaid expenses was not successful. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim for contract notice pay was not successful. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim was struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,826
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.