Case 2302267/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Heath v Finesse Heating Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2302267/2022
- Decision date
- 20 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Cawthray Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Heath
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Finesse Heating Ltd had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr D Heath’s wages by failing to pay the full amount due on 28 February 2022. It ordered the respondent to pay £2,149.53 gross in respect of that deduction, subject to any deductions for tax and national insurance that were due.
The tribunal also found an unauthorised deduction from wages arising from the respondent’s failure to pay Mr Heath in lieu of 5 days of accrued but untaken annual leave on termination of employment. It ordered payment of £496.02 gross for that sum, again subject to deductions for tax and national insurance where applicable.
No other claims, legal tests, or separate remedy components are identified in the written judgment. The total monetary award on the face of the judgment was £2,645.55 gross.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deduction claim for failure to pay the full amount of wages due on 28 February 2022. | Upheld | — | £2,150 |
| Holiday pay | Unauthorised deduction claim for failure to pay in lieu of 5 days' accrued but untaken annual leave on termination. | Upheld | — | £496 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,646
- 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.