Case 2214544/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Wolf Data Systems Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2214544/2023
- Decision date
- 8 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Smart JUDGMENT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London Central Employment Tribunal on 8 January 2024 before Employment Judge G Smart. The judgment records that the hearing proceeded by video for the claimant and that there was no ET3 or attendance from the respondent, Wolf Data Systems Limited.
The tribunal upheld the claimant Mr Philip Crozier’s unlawful deduction of wages claim. It ordered the respondent to pay £1,519.23 gross for unauthorised deductions of wages, with the claimant asked to account for any tax to HMRC as appropriate.
The tribunal also upheld the claimant’s breach of contract claim. It ordered the respondent to pay £211.15 for unpaid expenses outstanding on termination of employment. The judgment contains no further findings on liability beyond these monetary orders and no separate remedy breakdown beyond the two sums awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claim for unlawful deduction of wages succeeded and ordered payment of the gross sum of £1,519.23 for unauthorised deductions of wages. The claimant was requested to account for any tax to HMRC as appropriate. | Upheld | — | £1,519 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the breach of contract claim succeeded and ordered payment of £211.15 for unpaid expenses outstanding upon termination of employment. | Upheld | — | £211 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,730
- 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.