Case 2407914/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss D Evans v Westmorland Hospitality Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2407914/2022
- Decision date
- 14 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss D Evans
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with the case under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 because the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge Phil Allen recorded that a determination could properly be made on the claim without a hearing, and the listed hearing on 18 January 2023 was cancelled.
On the merits, the tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant the net sum of £341. The written record also included the standard notice under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990: the relevant decision day was 14 December 2022, interest would start on 15 December 2022 if the sum was not paid within 14 days, and the stipulated rate was 8% per annum.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £341. | Upheld | — | £341 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £341
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, Article 12
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.