Case 2401391/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss V Barta v Decaf Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2401391/2024
- Decision date
- 24 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss V Barta
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Manchester by CVP on 14 May 2024 before Employment Judge Phil Allen. The claimant, Miss V Barta, appeared in person; the respondent, Decaf Limited, did not attend and was not represented, no response having been submitted. The judgment was issued under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013.
The Tribunal found that the complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages was well founded. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant the net sum of £503.27 deducted without authorisation on 12 January 2024, the gross sum of £67.30 in respect of tips that should have been paid by 12 January 2024, and the gross sum of £160.00 for a week worked in lieu at the start of employment, also payable by 12 January 2024.
Reasons were given orally at the hearing and written reasons were not provided absent a request. An accompanying notice records the relevant decision day as 24 May 2024 and the stipulated rate of interest under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 as 8%, applicable if the award is not paid within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages well founded under Rule 21 (respondent did not attend and no response was submitted). Three sums ordered: net £503.27 deducted on 12 January 2024; gross £67.30 in respect of tips; gross £160.00 for a week worked in lieu at start of employment. The gov.uk listing also mentioned Working Time Regulations, but the judgment text adjudicates only the unauthorised deduction from wages complaint; no separate WTR or holiday pay finding is recorded in the available text. | Upheld | — | £731 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £731
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 - Rule 21
- 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.