Case 2301867/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms R Suri v Oxygen Technical Solutions Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2301867/2020
- Decision date
- 13 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Andrews Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms R Suri
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Andrews Date gave judgment under Rule 21. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from Ms R Suri's wages and ordered Oxygen Technical Solutions Ltd to pay £7,770, described in the judgment as 8 weeks at £925 net wages plus £46.25 pension contributions.
The written judgment does not set out further reasoning for the award. It states that all other claims are dismissed, and the hearing listed for 12 March 2021 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £7,770, described in the judgment as 8 weeks at £925 net wages and £46.25 pension contributions. | Upheld | — | £7,770 |
| Breach of contract | Disposed of by the judgment's statement that all other claims are dismissed; the written record does not give separate reasoning for this claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Disposed of by the judgment's statement that all other claims are dismissed; the written record does not give separate reasoning for this claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Disposed of by the judgment's statement that all other claims are dismissed; the written record does not give separate reasoning for this claim. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,770
- across all upheld claims
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.