Case 2300304/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Beardshaw, first claimant For the v MTA Solicitors LLP (In Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2300304/2023
- Decision date
- 27 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Elliott Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Beardshaw, first claimant For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a remote hearing on 27 July 2023 before Employment Judge Elliott, the tribunal recorded that the respondent, MTA Solicitors LLP (in voluntary liquidation), should pay sums to the three claimants. No appearance was entered for the respondent. The judgment text supplied sets out the awards but does not contain any further factual narrative or reasons beyond the heads of payment.
The first claimant, Mr E Beardshaw, was awarded £538.46 in respect of notice pay. That is classified here as a breach of contract claim. The second claimant, Ms O Oyeniyi, was awarded £4,146.79 for unlawful deductions from wages, and the third claimant, Ms A Brewster, was awarded £1,064.52 for unlawful deductions from wages.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment records this sum as being payable to the first claimant in respect of notice pay. | Upheld | — | £538 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records this sum as being payable to the second claimant for unlawful deductions from wages. | Upheld | — | £4,147 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records this sum as being payable to the third claimant for unlawful deductions from wages. | Upheld | — | £1,065 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,750
- 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.