Case 2301110/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Salamun v The Hospital Fertility Group — 2024
- Case reference
- 2301110/2023
- Decision date
- 21 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Andrews Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Salamun
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the London South Employment Tribunals on 9 March 2023. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and had failed to pay a signing fee, on-call wages (calculated at £20 per day for 92 days), TOIL for 53 hours, training costs and uniform costs that the claimant had paid for, and the claimant's holiday entitlement.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £9,439.68 in total, with the claimant required to account to HMRC for any sums owed in respect of payments received pursuant to the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
7 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deductions from wages; £317.92 net. | Upheld | — | £318 |
| Breach of contract | Unpaid signing fee of £2,000 gross. | Upheld | — | £2,000 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unpaid on-call wages: £20/day x 92 days = £1,840 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,840 |
| Working time regulations | Unpaid TOIL for 53 hours = £1,820.55 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,821 |
| Breach of contract | Training costs the claimant had to pay for, £133.33 gross. | Upheld | — | £133 |
| Breach of contract | Uniform costs the claimant had to pay for, £133.33 gross. | Upheld | — | £133 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid holiday entitlement of £3,194.55. | Upheld | — | £3,195 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,440
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.