Case 2411216/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Sholliker v Griffin Care Homes Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2411216/2021
- Decision date
- 14 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Howard Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Sholliker
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt with the claim under rule 21 because Griffin Care Homes Ltd failed to present a valid response on time. On that basis, Employment Judge Howard Date made a determination of the claim without a contested hearing.
The judgment found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from Miss J Sholliker's wages. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £980.10, stated in the judgment as 110 hours at £8.91 per hour.
The text also includes the standard tribunal interest notice under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990, but no separate interest sum is recorded in the judgment itself. The operative monetary award in the judgment is the gross sum of £980.10.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Determined under rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. The tribunal ordered payment of the gross sum of £980.10, calculated as 110 hours x £8.91. | Upheld | — | £980 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £980
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.