Case 2403599/2022 · Employment Tribunal
K Hazelden v The Whitesmith Arms Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2403599/2022
- Decision date
- 5 August 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
K Hazelden
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Johnson therefore made a determination under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The tribunal did not list any oral hearing, and the hearing listed for 7 October 2022 was cancelled.
On the substantive claim, the tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £325.00.
The judgment also includes a notice under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990. It records that interest would accrue if the sum were not paid within 14 days after the judgment was sent to the parties, with the stipulated rate stated as 8% and the relevant judgment day given as 5 August 2022.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent did not present a valid response on time. The tribunal determined the claim under Rule 21 and found an unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £325 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £325
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.