Case 2400642/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Thomas-Anthony Manners v Intrinsic Cleaning Ltd trading as Intrinsic FM — 2020
- Case reference
- 2400642/2020
- Decision date
- 16 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hoey
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Thomas-Anthony Manners
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued because the respondent did not present a response. On the information available, Employment Judge Hoey found that the claimant's claim for unlawful deductions was well founded.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unlawful deductions from the claimant's wages by failing to pay the full amount of his December 2019 wages, identified as £338.58 gross, and his January wages, identified as £825 gross. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £1,163.58 gross, being the total of those unpaid sums.
The judgment also recorded that the hearing listed for 24 March 2020 was cancelled and would not take place. The separate notice on interest stated the relevant decision day as 16 March 2020 and the calculation day as 17 March 2020, but the judgment itself did not quantify any interest award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment in the respondent's absence. The tribunal found unlawful deductions because the respondent failed to pay the full amount of the claimant's December 2019 wages (£338.58) and January wages (£825). | Upheld | — | £1,164 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,164
- 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.