Case 2207683/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Golding V v Savants Restructuring Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2207683/2020
- Decision date
- 31 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Deol Date
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Golding V
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Respondent did not enter a response, and the tribunal issued judgment under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 in respect of the Claimant's unpaid wages and unpaid holiday pay claims. The judgment was in the Claimant's favour on those elements, with the tribunal recording gross unpaid salary of £1,250.00 and gross unpaid holiday pay of £2,724.36.
The tribunal ordered the Respondent to pay a total of £3,974.36. No award was made in relation to the Claimant's claim for unpaid rent for the Respondent's items or the claim for employer's national insurance and pension contributions.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal issued judgment in the Claimant's favour under rule 21 in respect of unpaid wages. The award for this element was gross unpaid salary of £1,250.00. | Upheld | — | £1,250 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal issued judgment in the Claimant's favour under rule 21 in respect of unpaid holiday pay. The award for this element was gross unpaid holiday pay of £2,724.36. | Upheld | — | £2,724 |
| Other | No award was made in relation to the Claimant's claim for unpaid rent for the Respondent's items. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | No award was made in relation to the claim for employer's national insurance and pension contributions. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,974
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 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.