Case 2400077/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms P Harrison v Donna Wakefield — 2020
- Case reference
- 2400077/2020
- Decision date
- 29 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms P Harrison
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in favour of Ms P Harrison against Donna Wakefield. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages within the meaning of the wages claim before it.
The only monetary award recorded in the judgment was the gross sum of £400.00, which the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay to the claimant. No separate breakdown of the award was given for any other head of loss.
A separate notice attached to the judgment explained the tribunal interest regime under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990. It stated that the relevant decision day was 29 June 2020, the calculation day was 30 June 2020, and the stipulated rate of interest was 8%, but the judgment itself did not quantify any interest payable.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment: the tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £400.00. | Upheld | — | £400 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £400
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.