Case 2301643/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Cocoon Global Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301643/2022
- Decision date
- 17 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Coen
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr Ziwei Zhou, brought a claim against Cocoon Global Ltd for unauthorised deductions from wages. The case was heard on 17 August 2022 at London Central before Employment Judge Coen sitting alone. No response had been presented by the respondent, so the tribunal proceeded under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013.
The tribunal held that the claimant’s claim in relation to unauthorised deductions from wages succeeded. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the net sum of £724.25 in respect of unauthorised deductions from the claimant’s wages in March 2022.
The written record also notes that, provided the respondent makes appropriate deductions for income tax and national insurance and accounts to the proper authorities, payment of the net sum will discharge the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | No response to the claim was presented. The tribunal made a Rule 21 judgment that the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages succeeded and ordered payment of the net sum of £724.25 in respect of deductions from March 2022. | Upheld | — | £724 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £724
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 Employment Tribunal Rules 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.