Case 2304405/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Gomez v A Force London Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2304405/2023
- Decision date
- 11 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McLaren Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Gomez
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the London South Employment Tribunals on 13 August 2023. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, so the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The judgment records that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and that the claimant was entitled to £779.00 gross on that claim.
The tribunal also found that the respondent failed to provide the claimant with a written statement of initial employment particulars pursuant to section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claimant succeeded under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 and was awarded the minimum damages of two weeks' pay, assessed at £1,000.00 gross. The total award was £1,779.00 gross, and the hearing listed for 16 January 2024 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £779.00 gross. | Upheld | — | £779 |
| Other | The tribunal found the respondent failed to provide a written statement of initial employment particulars pursuant to section 1 ERA 1996. The claimant succeeded under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 and was awarded the minimum damages of two weeks' pay, £1,000.00 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,779
- 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.