Case 2407211/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr H G Jones v Konsulter Limited (in compulsory liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 2407211/2021
- Decision date
- 8 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Holmes Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr H G Jones
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with the claim under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 after the time for presenting a response had expired and no valid response had been presented by the respondent. It found that Konsulter Group Limited had made unauthorised deductions from Mr H G Jones's wages in respect of wages due for the period April to May 2021.
The tribunal awarded Mr Jones the total sum of £3,482.14. It directed that the respondent was to pay the gross sum, less any appropriate deductions for tax and national insurance, for which the respondent must account to HMRC.
Although the claimant had indicated a breach of contract claim, the judgment records that he later confirmed he was only claiming unpaid wages. The tribunal therefore stated that unlawful deductions from wages were the only award it made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages due in April to May 2021 and ordered payment of the gross sum less appropriate deductions for tax and national insurance. | Upheld | — | £3,482 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,482
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21, 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.