Case 2403693/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss K Zurawliw v BP Telecoms Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 2403693/2023
- Decision date
- 23 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mellor REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss K Zurawliw
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Mellor found that BP Telecoms Ltd had made an unauthorised deduction from Miss K Zurawliw's wages by deducting a discretionary bonus that had previously been paid on 28 December 2022. The tribunal ordered repayment of £553.73 net in respect of that deduction.
The tribunal then applied section 270A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and increased the award by 10%, adding £55.37 because of the respondent's failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. The total sum payable was therefore £609.10.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages by deducting a discretionary bonus previously paid on 28 December 2022. The award on the claim was £553.73 net. The judgment also records a separate 10% uplift of £55.37 under section 270A TULRCA 1992 for failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures. | Upheld | — | £554 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £609
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.270A TULRCA 1992
- ACAS Code of Practice on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures
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.