Case 2308183/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S. Beck v CWind Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2308183/2020
- Decision date
- 14 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T.R. Smith
- Venue
- London South via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S. Beck
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe written judgment records that the claimant's contract with the respondent was terminated on 19 July 2020. It then states that the claimant presented her claim form within the time periods specified in section 23(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and regulation 30(2) of the Working Time Regulations.
The written record does not set out any substantive merits finding, liability decision, or monetary award. It notes that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days of the sending of the written record.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The written record states that the claimant's claim form was presented within the time period in section 23(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996; no merits outcome or monetary award is recorded in the text. | Other | — | — |
| Working time regulations | The written record states that the claimant's claim form was presented within the time period in regulation 30(2) of the Working Time Regulations; no merits outcome or monetary award is recorded in the text. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 23(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- regulation 30(2) of the Working Time Regulations
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.