Case 2304629/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Noel v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2304629/2023
- Decision date
- 28 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heath
- Venue
- London South
- Panel members
- Mrs H Carter, Ms C Edwards
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Noel
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that, following the respondent's concession on 17 July 2025, the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well-founded. It found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum deducted, £6,857.72, with the claimant responsible for any tax or National Insurance.
The tribunal dismissed the remaining claims. It recorded that the claims of unfair dismissal, discrimination arising from disability, discrimination by failure to make reasonable adjustments, and harassment were not well-founded.
Reasons were given orally at the hearing. The written judgment does not set out further factual findings or reasoning unless written reasons are requested under the stated procedure.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The complaint was found well-founded upon the respondent's concession on 17 July 2025. | Upheld | — | £6,858 |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment states that the unfair dismissal claim was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the claim of discrimination arising from disability was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment states that the claim of discrimination by failure to make reasonable adjustments was not well-founded and was dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The judgment lists harassment with the disability claims and states it was not well-founded and was dismissed; the protected characteristic is inferred from that context. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,858
- 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.