Case 2409651/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Pruden v Griffin Nursery Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2409651/2023
- Decision date
- 10 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Pruden
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy Rule 21 judgment, Employment Judge Phil Allen found that Griffin Nursery Ltd had made unauthorised deductions from Mrs L Pruden's July and August 2023 wages and ordered payment of £1,894.64 net. The tribunal also found a breach of contract in relation to pension contributions deducted from the claimant's pay and awarded £142.48 gross, and it found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, awarding £2,713.84 gross.
The tribunal further found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £4,293.50. The judgment recorded that the claimant would be responsible for any tax liabilities arising out of the gross awards if tax was not deducted at source, and the total sum ordered was £9,044.46.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Net award for unauthorised deductions from July and August 2023 wages. | Upheld | — | £1,895 |
| Breach of contract | Gross damages for failure to pay pension contributions deducted from the claimant's pay. | Upheld | — | £142 |
| Wrongful dismissal | Gross damages awarded for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £2,714 |
| Redundancy | Redundancy payment awarded after the tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy. | Upheld | — | £4,294 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,044
- 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.