Case 2300484/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A Kerly v Artificial Solutions UK Ltd (in Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2300484/2021
- Decision date
- 27 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ferguson
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A Kerly
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Respondent failed to enter a response to the claim. Employment Judge Ferguson, sitting alone, gave judgment that the Claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, was unfairly dismissed, had unauthorised deductions made from wages, and was not paid holiday entitlement.
The Tribunal ordered the Respondent to pay £5,414.58 for breach of contract in respect of notice, a compensatory award of £3,980.71 for unfair dismissal, £3,753.90 gross for unauthorised deductions from wages, and £2,545.16 gross for unpaid holiday entitlement. The total award stated for recoupment purposes was £15,694.35, with a prescribed element of £3,980.71 and a balance of £11,713.64.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The judgment states the Claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awards damages of £5,414.58. | Upheld | — | £5,415 |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states the Claimant was unfairly dismissed and awards a compensatory award of £3,980.71. | Upheld | — | £3,981 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states the Respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages and awards the gross sum of £3,753.90. | Upheld | — | £3,754 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states the Respondent failed to pay the Claimant's holiday entitlement and awards the gross sum of £2,545.16. | Upheld | — | £2,545 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £15,694
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £3,981
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.