Case 2404707/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms P Singh v Manhattan Partners Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2404707/2022
- Decision date
- 12 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Leach Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms P Singh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Judge determined the claim under Rule 21 because the respondent did not present a valid response on time. On that basis, the tribunal was satisfied it could make a determination on the papers and listed the hearing for 27 October 2022 as cancelled. The judgment records that the claimant was Ms P Singh and the respondent was Manhattan Partners Ltd.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages for February 2022. It ordered the respondent to pay £2,692.99 gross, described as the total of two unauthorised deductions of £1,082.00 and £1,610.99.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant for 4.3 days of accrued untaken holiday. It ordered payment of £413.46 gross, calculated at a daily rate of £96.15. The written notice attached to the judgment states that interest is payable under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 if the sums are not paid within 14 days, but the judgment itself does not quantify any interest award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal made a Rule 21 determination after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. It found unauthorised deductions from wages for February 2022 and ordered payment of the gross sum of £2,692.99, made up of two deductions of £1,082.00 and £1,610.99. | Upheld | — | £2,693 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay for 4.3 days of accrued untaken holiday and ordered payment of £413.46 gross, calculated at a daily rate of £96.15. | Upheld | — | £413 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,106
- 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.