Case 2402099/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Kirk v Future Digital Media Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2402099/2019
- Decision date
- 31 July 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Parkin Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Kirk
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal decided the case under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. It found that Future Digital Media Ltd had made an unauthorised deduction from Miss J Kirk's wages and ordered the respondent to pay £370.60 net. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £307.69.
The judgment states that the damages for breach of contract were assessed on the basis of the claimant's gross pay for the notice period. It also notes that once the respondent pays that amount, HMRC is likely to require the claimant to pay tax and national insurance on it as Post-Employment Notice Pay.
The hearing listed for 2 August 2019 was cancelled. The judgment records the two monetary awards separately and does not set out any broader remedy beyond those sums.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal ordered payment of the net sum of £370.60 for an unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £371 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £307.69, assessed on the claimant's gross pay for the notice period. | Upheld | — | £308 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £678
- 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.