Case 2304860/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S. Hussain v Bookingtek Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2304860/2020
- Decision date
- 28 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T.R. Smith
- Venue
- London South via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S. Hussain
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs S. Hussain brought complaints described by the tribunal as an unlawful deduction from wages and/or a breach of regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 against Bookingtek Ltd. The hearing took place on 28 April 2022 before Employment Judge T.R. Smith, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by Mr Vidal, the chief finance officer.
The tribunal held that the complaints were not well founded and dismissed them. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days. No monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal described the complaint as an unlawful deduction from wages and/or breach of regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 and held it was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The tribunal described the complaint as an unlawful deduction from wages and/or breach of regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998 and held it was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.