Case 2404775/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss M Braye v EVS Healthcare Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2404775/2022
- Decision date
- 1 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss M Braye
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 25 August 2022, Employment Judge Phil Allen entered judgment under Rule 21 in favour of Miss M Braye against EVS Healthcare Ltd. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £294.40.
The judgment also records a deduction for DBS registration cost and orders payment of the net sum of £40.00. The hearing listed for 28 September 2022 was cancelled.
The tribunal stated that no award could be made for compensation for time lost or stress because it had no power to make any such award in this kind of case. The written judgment was sent to the parties on 1 September 2022.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £294.40. | Upheld | — | £294 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records a deduction for DBS registration cost and orders payment of the net sum of £40.00. | Upheld | — | £40 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £334
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.