Case 2302151/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Shether v Vijay Lowdell — 2022
- Case reference
- 2302151/2022
- Decision date
- 22 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McLaren Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Shether
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the London South Employment Tribunals on 26 June 2022. The judgment states that the respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and that the Employment Judge therefore made a determination 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 and ordered payment of £318.50 gross. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £135.50.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £455 in total. No other remedy components are recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal recorded that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £318.50 gross under rule 21 after no valid response was presented on time. | Upheld | — | £319 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal recorded that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £135.50 under rule 21 after no valid response was presented on time. | Upheld | — | £136 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £455
- 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.