Case 2405229/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Canal v Chrosami Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2405229/2019
- Decision date
- 29 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Parkin Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Canal
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that Mr L Canal was employed by Chrosami Ltd as a waiter at 46-48 Church Street, Lancaster. It found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from his wages in respect of £215.38 holiday pay, £64.60 for hours worked in December 2018 and January 2019, and £66.42 for hours worked in March 2019.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the total gross sum of £346.40. It also recorded that no award was made for notice pay because the claimant had not claimed notice pay or breach of contract. The judgment was issued under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, and the hearing listed for 30 August 2019 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages comprising £215.38 holiday pay, £64.60 for hours worked in December 2018 and January 2019, and £66.42 for March 2019 hours worked. | Upheld | — | £346 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £346
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.