Case 2414140/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Dooner v Funky Owl (DAK) Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 2414140/2019
- Decision date
- 10 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Horne
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Dooner
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was made under Rule 21. The tribunal found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £618.60, subject to any required deductions for tax and national insurance.
The tribunal also found that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's accrued holiday pay and ordered payment of £606.19, again subject to any required deductions for tax and national insurance. The attached notice explained the statutory interest position if the award was not paid within 14 days, but no fixed interest sum was awarded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment states the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment subject to required deductions for tax and national insurance. | Upheld | — | £619 |
| Holiday pay | Judgment states the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's accrued holiday pay and ordered payment subject to required deductions for tax and national insurance. | Upheld | — | £606 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,225
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 – Rule 21
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.