Case 2405218/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Carrington v Little Black Pug (NW) Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2405218/2020
- Decision date
- 11 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Carrington
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal determined the case on Rule 21 and made two substantive awards. First, it found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £114.94.
Second, it found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered the respondent to pay damages of £98.52. The judgment required both sums to be paid within 14 days.
The attached notice explained that, if the sums were not paid within 14 days after the judgment was sent to the parties, interest could accrue under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 at the stipulated rate stated in the notice. No separate interest figure was set out in the judgment itself.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £114.94. | Upheld | — | £115 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £98.52. | Upheld | — | £99 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £213
- 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.