Case 2414134/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Rebecca Lowe & Bernadette Heywood v Madji Ali — 2021
- Case reference
- 2414134/2020
- Decision date
- 5 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Wheat
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Rebecca Lowe & Bernadette Heywood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal, sitting alone, heard the claims remotely on 27 April 2021. It held that the claimants' claims for unauthorised deductions under section 13(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 were well founded and succeeded. The judgment records that the awards were gross figures and that the respondent should deduct any income tax and national insurance payable before making net payment to each claimant.
Rebecca Lowe was awarded £9,130.01 gross and Bernadette Heywood was awarded £3,938.43 gross. No separate breakdown is given between liability and remedy beyond those gross sums. The written record also notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rebecca Lowe's claim for unauthorised deductions under s.13(1) ERA 1996 succeeded; she was awarded £9,130.01 gross. | Upheld | — | £9,130 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Bernadette Heywood's claim for unauthorised deductions under s.13(1) ERA 1996 succeeded; she was awarded £3,938.43 gross. | Upheld | — | £3,938 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £13,068
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.13(1) Employment Rights Act 1996
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.