Case 2302988/2020 · Employment Tribunal
N Vaz v Voiceflex Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2302988/2020
- Decision date
- 30 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Burge Representation
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
N Vaz
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that the claimant's claim for unlawful deductions from wages was well founded and succeeded. It also held that the unfair dismissal claim was well founded and succeeded. No written reasons accompanied the decision because reasons were given orally at the hearing.
On remedy, the tribunal directed that there should be a Polkey reduction of 80% to the compensatory award. If the parties could not agree remedy, they were to write to the tribunal by 13 August 2021 to request a three-hour remedy hearing. The written record does not include a final monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held the claim well founded and directed a Polkey reduction of 80% to the compensatory award. The written record does not set out the full remedy because the parties were invited to agree remedy or request a separate hearing. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Polkey reduction
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.