Case 2400261/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Smith v B & R Care Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2400261/2020
- Decision date
- 17 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Franey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss S Smith brought a complaint of unauthorised deductions from pay against B&R Care Limited. By consent, the respondent title was amended to reflect its proper corporate title. Employment Judge Franey sat alone and found that it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented within three months of the deduction, and that it was presented within a further period that was reasonable, so the Tribunal had jurisdiction to deal with it.
The Tribunal upheld the unauthorised deductions from pay complaint and found it was well founded. However, it made no order requiring the respondent to make any payment to the claimant. The reasons given were that the respondent had already paid the claimant the amount deducted from her pay on 1 September 2019, and that on the evidence heard the Tribunal did not consider it appropriate to order any further payment to compensate for financial loss attributable to the deduction.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal held that the complaint of unauthorised deductions from pay was well founded. It also found it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim within three months of the deduction and that it was presented within a further reasonable period. | Upheld | — | — |
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.