Case 2400190/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Garside v Brighter Childcare Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2400190/2022
- Decision date
- 23 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Garside
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued in the Manchester Employment Tribunals on 11 January 2022. The judgment records that the respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Leach determined that the claim, or part of it, could properly be decided under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that Brighter Childcare Limited had made unauthorised deductions from Miss S Garside's wages. On that basis, the unlawful deduction from wages claim was upheld and the respondent was ordered to pay £835.95 gross.
The written judgment also included the standard tribunal interest notice. It recorded 23 June 2022 as the relevant judgment day, 24 June 2022 as the calculation day, and a stipulated interest rate of 8% if the award was not paid within 14 days. No separate interest sum was quantified in the judgment itself.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Determined under rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. | Upheld | — | £836 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £836
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21, Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990
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.