Case 2301251/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Miller v Vaughans Forge Limited and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301251/2022
- Decision date
- 9 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge D Wright
- Venue
- London South via CVP
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss L Miller
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge D Wright, sitting alone, recorded that the claim against the Second Respondent was dismissed upon withdrawal. The judgment then ordered the First Respondent to pay £4,892.07 net of tax for unpaid wages and a further £244.60 for unpaid pension contributions, with the wages sum subject to accounting for any tax and national insurance due to HMRC.
The Tribunal also applied the presumption under section 163(2) Employment Rights Act 1996 and found that the Claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy, the First Respondent not having rebutted that presumption. On that basis, the Claimant was awarded redundancy pay of £4,600. The total sum due under the judgment was £9,736.67, payable within 14 days of service of the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The claim against the Second Respondent was dismissed upon withdrawal. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The First Respondent was ordered to pay £4,892.07 net of tax for unpaid wages and an additional £244.60 for unpaid pension contributions. The judgment records that the First Respondent was to account to HMRC for any tax and national insurance due on the wages sum. | Upheld | — | £5,137 |
| Redundancy | Applying the presumption under section 163(2) Employment Rights Act 1996, which the First Respondent had not rebutted, the Tribunal found the Claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and awarded redundancy pay. | Upheld | — | £4,600 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,737
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 163(2) Employment Rights Act 1996 presumption
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.