Case 2215467/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Campanile v HMP Construction Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2215467/2023
- Decision date
- 9 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shukla
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Campanile
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting alone before Employment Judge Shukla, dealt with two monetary employment claims brought by Ms Campanile against HMP Construction Limited. The respondent did not attend. The judgment records that the complaint of unauthorised deductions from pay was presented outside the applicable time limit, but the tribunal found it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time and that it was presented within a further reasonable period, so the claim could proceed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the complaint was presented out of time, but that it was not reasonably practicable to present it within the applicable time limit and that it was presented within a further reasonable period. It then held the complaint about pay for March and April 2023 was well-founded as a series of deductions. | Upheld | — | £4,667 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal determined under section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996 that the claimant was entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £4,308 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,975
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- not reasonably practicable
- section 163 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.