Case 2401010/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Cisak v Winner Recruitment (Birmingham) Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2401010/2020
- Decision date
- 26 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Feeney
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Cisak
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn a Rule 21 judgment, Employment Judge Feeney found that the respondent, Winner Recruitment, had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay Miss M Cisak the gross/net sum of £44.93.
The judgment does not set out any additional liability findings beyond the wage deduction claim, and it does not apportion the award into separate remedy components. A standard notice under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 followed the judgment, stating the relevant decision day as 26 August 2020 and the stipulated rate of interest as 8%, but no separate quantified interest award was included in the judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of £44.93. The written judgment also included a standard interest notice, but no separate interest sum was quantified in the judgment itself. | Upheld | — | £45 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £45
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.