Case 2303176/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Thompson For the v Ms P Ericsson T/a Pure Gold Thai Spa — 2021
- Case reference
- 2303176/2020
- Decision date
- 10 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Siddall
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Thompson For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard by Employment Judge Siddall sitting alone at London South by video on 10 November 2021. The respondent was Ms Panorn Ericsson trading as Pure Gold Thai Spa. The tribunal recorded that the claimant was represented by Mr P Thompson and the respondent appeared in person.
The tribunal upheld the claim for unlawful deductions from wages and awarded the claimant £2,640.00 gross. It also upheld a breach of contract claim and awarded £240.00 gross in damages, described as one week’s notice pay. A further award of £480.00 gross was made because the respondent failed to provide the claimant with a written statement of the particulars of employment.
The claim for payment for annual leave did not succeed. The total sum awarded to the claimant was £3,360.00 gross.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal awarded £2,640.00 gross for unlawful deductions from wages. | Upheld | — | £2,640 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal awarded £240.00 gross in damages for breach of contract, representing one week’s notice pay. | Upheld | — | £240 |
| Other | The tribunal awarded £480.00 gross because the respondent failed to provide a written statement of the particulars of employment. | Upheld | — | £480 |
| Holiday pay | The claim for payment for annual leave did not succeed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,360
- 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.