Mr G Anning v Bell Group Limited — 2023

Case reference: 2304939/2022
Decision date: 25 May 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Evans Representation

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr G Anning

Respondent

Bell Group Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Mr G Anning brought a claim against Bell Group Limited for unauthorised deductions from wages. The tribunal found that the respondent had deducted £1,208.72 from the claimant's wages in breach of section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and ordered the respondent to pay that amount to him.

The judgment also records that the respondent's employer's contract claim failed and was dismissed. No separate award is recorded for that claim in the judgment. The hearing was before Employment Judge Evans sitting alone by video at Croydon on 25 May 2023.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	The tribunal found that £1,208.72 had been deducted from the claimant's wages in breach of section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.	Upheld	—	£1,209
Breach of contract	The judgment states that the respondent's employer's contract claim failed and was dismissed.	Dismissed	—	—

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £1,209; across all upheld claims
Compensatory award: £1,209; compensatory remedy recorded

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.