Case 2401081/2025 · Employment Tribunal
S Flesh v C4 Cleansing Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2401081/2025
- Decision date
- 4 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge KM Ross
Parties
2 namedClaimant
S Flesh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Manchester Employment Tribunal on 31 March 2025. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well-founded. It held that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages in the period 17 February 2025 to 24 February 2025.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £843.75, described in the judgment as the gross sum deducted. The judgment also records that the claimant is responsible for any tax or National Insurance due on that sum, and that the hearing listed for 2 October 2025 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found a well-founded complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages for the period 17 February 2025 to 24 February 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, so the claim was determined under rule 22. | Upheld | — | £844 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £844
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.