Case 2301088/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person v Ms J Girgenti (Director) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2301088/2020
- Decision date
- 16 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a telephone hearing on 16 September 2020, Employment Judge D A Pearl sat alone and noted that the matter had been listed after the video hearing failed for technological reasons. The judgment records that there was a broad measure of agreement between the parties and that the decision was by consent.
The tribunal held that the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages was well founded and awarded the claimant £2,884.60 gross. It also recorded that the holiday pay claim succeeded, with £244.60 gross awarded on that head.
The contractual claim for notice also succeeded. The tribunal awarded £2,307.68 gross for that claim, noting that all sums were gross and that, for the contractual claim, it had no basis for assessing tax. The total awarded was £5,436.88.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal recorded that the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages was well founded and ordered payment of £2,884.60 gross. | Upheld | — | £2,885 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal recorded that the holiday pay claim succeeded and ordered payment of £244.60 gross. | Upheld | — | £245 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal recorded that the contractual claim for notice succeeded and ordered payment of £2,307.68 gross. | Upheld | — | £2,308 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,437
- 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.