Case 2305902/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms D.P.Gonzalez v The ICM Group Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2305902/2023
- Decision date
- 18 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hindmarch Appearances
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms D.P.Gonzalez
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that Ms D.P. Gonzalez was an employee of The ICM Group Ltd at the relevant time. It upheld her complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages, finding that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions in the period March to June 2023. The judgment ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £4,289.00, described as the gross sum deducted, and noted that the claimant is responsible for any tax or National Insurance due on that sum.
The tribunal also upheld the unfair dismissal complaint. It ordered the respondent to pay a basic award of £1,406.70 and a compensatory award of £1,251.68. The extracted judgment does not set out further reasoning for the liability findings beyond recording that the complaints were well founded. The respondent did not attend the hearing.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £4,289 |
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £2,658 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £6,947
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £1,407
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £1,252
- compensatory remedy recorded
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.