Case 2402480/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Harding v G.A.L Cleaning Services Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2402480/2022
- Decision date
- 29 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Harding
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal determined the claim 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, Employment Judge Leach made a determination 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 G.A.L Cleaning Services Ltd to pay Miss K Harding the gross sum of £320.00, calculated as £10 per hour for 32 hours.
The judgment also included the standard interest notice under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990. It states that if the award is not paid within 14 days after the judgment was sent to the parties, statutory interest accrues at the stipulated rate of 8% from 30 July 2022, but no separate interest amount was fixed in the judgment itself.
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. | Upheld | — | £320 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £320
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- 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.