Case 2408471/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Kerri Anne Graham v Evolve Academy — 2022
- Case reference
- 2408471/2021
- Decision date
- 7 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspinall Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Kerri Anne Graham
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal made a Rule 21 judgment on both liability and remedy by consent. The respondent had not presented a valid response on time, and Mr Harkness confirmed that no Response Form had been submitted, that the respondent did not contest the claim, agreed the amount claimed, and did not wish to be heard on remedy. The hearing listed as a preliminary hearing was converted by consent to a public hearing for that purpose.
The claimant’s case was that the respondent had failed to provide itemised pay statements and had failed to make pension contributions after deductions were taken from her wages on the understanding that those contributions would be paid. The claim was quantified as missing deductions of £18.34 in March 2019, £74.00 per month for 15 months, and £23.97 in July 2020.
The tribunal held that the claim succeeded and ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £1,152.31. The judgment does not separate the award into distinct heads of loss beyond that total figure, and the attached interest notice explains the tribunal’s usual interest provisions rather than awarding any additional sum in this case.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment made by consent after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time and did not contest the claim. The claim was quantified as missing deductions of £18.34 in March 2019, £74.00 per month for 15 months, and £23.97 in July 2020. | Upheld | — | £1,152 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,152
- 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.