Case 2401833/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Buckingham v Morgan’s Estate Services Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2401833/2020
- Decision date
- 23 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Buckingham
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued by Employment Judge Phil Allen. On the papers, the tribunal found that Morgan’s Estate Services Ltd had made an unauthorised deduction from Mrs S Buckingham’s wages and ordered the respondent to pay £917.47 gross.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant’s holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £61.24 in respect of that claim.
The judgment directed that the sums be paid within 14 days of the date of the judgment. It also recorded that the hearing listed for 4 June 2020 was cancelled. A separate notice set out the interest provisions under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 and recorded the relevant decision day as 23 April 2020, but no separate interest figure was stated in the judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £917.47. | Upheld | — | £917 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £61.24. | Upheld | — | £61 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £979
- 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.