Case 2303072/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss G Codrington v Richard Norman Care Ltd R1 Richard Norman Care Coordinators Ltd R2 — 2019
- Case reference
- 2303072/2019
- Decision date
- 21 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright Representation
- Venue
- London South Croydon
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss G Codrington
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at London South Croydon on 21 November 2019 before Employment Judge Wright. The claimant, Miss G Codrington, appeared in person and there was no attendance or representation for either respondent. By email timed at 10:21 on the day of the hearing, the director of both respondents said that the claimant worked for Richard Norman Care Coordinators Ltd rather than Richard Norman Care Ltd. Because it was not clear which entity the claimant worked for, Richard Norman Care Coordinators Ltd was added to the proceedings, and the tribunal was satisfied that it had notice of the claim.
The written record states that the claimant's claim was successful and that the respondents were ordered to pay her the gross sum of £343.85. The judgment was given orally at the hearing, and the record notes that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No further reasoning is included in the extracted written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The short written judgment does not name the legal label of the claim, but the GOV.UK listing for the case identifies it as an unlawful deduction from wages matter. The tribunal recorded only that the claimant's claim was successful and ordered payment of a gross sum of £343.85. | Upheld | — | £344 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £344
- 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.