Case 2414751/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss R O’Connor v IIK MCR Limited (in Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 2414751/2019
- Decision date
- 18 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss R O’Connor
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in favour of Miss R O’Connor against IIK MCR Limited (in Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation). The tribunal recorded that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £55 gross. It also recorded that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £347.64.
The judgment did not set out disputed evidence or reasons beyond the formal findings required for the default judgment. The hearing listed for 7 June 2021 was cancelled after judgment was entered. The total sums ordered by the tribunal were £402.64.
A separate notice under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 stated that sums payable under the judgment, other than excluded categories, would carry interest if unpaid 42 days after the judgment was sent to the parties. The notice recorded 18 March 2021 as the relevant judgment day and 8% as the stipulated rate of interest, but it did not quantify any interest amount in the judgment itself.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £55 for an unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £55 |
| Breach of contract | Tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £347.64. | Upheld | — | £348 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £403
- 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.