Case 2402057/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Khan v M&E Excellence Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2402057/2024
- Decision date
- 25 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Khan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal proceeded under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. On that basis, the Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made on the claim without a contested hearing.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay Miss M Khan the gross sum of £1,275.00, identified as unpaid wages for the period 3 January 2024 to 2 February 2024, calculated as one month at £1,275 gross per month.
The written decision also recorded that the claimant would be responsible for any tax liabilities arising from the gross award if tax was not deducted at source. A separate notice recorded the tribunal's interest information under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, including that no interest is payable if the sum is paid within 14 days of the decision being sent to the parties. The hearing listed for 22 July 2024 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Determined under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £1,275.00 for unpaid wages from 3 January 2024 to 2 February 2024. | Upheld | — | £1,275 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,275
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21, Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, article 12
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.