Case 2306116/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Arsaiboon v Quality Accounting Solutions Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2306116/2020
- Decision date
- 5 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wright Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the London South Employment Tribunals on 4 October 2020. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
On that basis, the tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £5,188.26 net. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,625.
The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £547.80. The judgment records a total award of £8,361.06.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of £5,188.26 net. | Upheld | — | £5,188 |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,625. | Upheld | — | £2,625 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £547.80. | Upheld | — | £548 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,361
- 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.