Case 2301823/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Rianna York v Chase PR & Social Media Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2301823/2020
- Decision date
- 19 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jones QC
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Rianna York
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Rianna York brought claims for unlawful deduction from wages and wrongful dismissal against Chase PR & Social Media Limited. The respondent did not attend the hearing and had filed no notice of appearance. Judge Jones QC heard evidence from Ms York, who confirmed the contents of her ET1. The claimant had given notice on 17 March 2020 to expire on 14 April 2020, but the respondent summarily dismissed her on 20 March 2020. Her gross monthly salary was £1,916 and her net monthly salary was £1,541.
On the unlawful deduction claim, the tribunal found that the relevant pay period was 28 February to 20 March 2020 inclusive, being 21 days. Applying the claimant's daily net rate of £50.69, the amount due was £1,115.18. Because the claimant had in fact been paid £1,119 on 28 March 2020, she had not been underpaid and that claim was dismissed.
On wrongful dismissal, the tribunal found that if the claimant had not been summarily dismissed, she would have worked from 21 March to 14 April 2020 inclusive, a period of 25 days. Her loss for that notice period was calculated at £1,267.25. The tribunal then grossed up that sum by 20% for tax purposes, producing a final award of £1,584.06, which the respondent was ordered to pay.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that for the period 28 February to 20 March 2020 the claimant was due net pay of £1,115.18, but she had received £1,119 on 28 March 2020, so there was no underpayment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal held that, had the claimant not been summarily dismissed on 20 March 2020, she would have worked from 21 March to 14 April 2020 and lost £1,267.25, which was grossed up by 20% to £1,584.06. | Upheld | — | £1,584 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,584
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,584
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.