Case 2404463/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Power v Silk Letting (In Voluntary Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 2404463/2023
- Decision date
- 4 July 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Power
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a valid response in time. The Employment Judge determined that the claim could properly be decided under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, and proceeded to enter judgment on the papers.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,923.25 gross. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £600 gross. A further award of £925.67 was made for unpaid holiday entitlement.
The written record included the standard notice on interest under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, stating that interest would accrue from 5 July 2023 if sums remained unpaid after 14 days, but no interest amount was quantified in the judgment. The hearing listed for 18 July 2023 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £1,923.25. | Upheld | — | £1,923 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered payment of £600 gross damages. | Upheld | — | £600 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment refers to unpaid holiday entitlement and orders payment of £925.67. Mapped here to holiday_pay. | Upheld | — | £926 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,449
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.