Case 2301283/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs I Samaan v SE Twenty Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301283/2022
- Decision date
- 9 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hart Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs I Samaan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the London South Employment Tribunals on 6 April 2022. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim, or part of it, under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On that basis, the tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £413.23 net in respect of that claim.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to provide the claimant with a written statement of employment particulars. It ordered compensation equivalent to 2 weeks' gross pay, assessed at £338.50. The total amount ordered was therefore £751.73.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £413.23 net. | Upheld | — | £413 |
| Other | The tribunal found the respondent failed to provide the claimant with a written statement of employment particulars and ordered 2 weeks' gross pay, quantified at £338.50. | Upheld | — | £339 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £752
- 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.