Case 2414834/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Andrews v South Manny Flavaz Ltd Heard via Cloud Video Platform (Manchester) — 2022
- Case reference
- 2414834/2021
- Decision date
- 6 May 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mellor Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Andrews
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 4 April 2022, before Employment Judge Mellor, Mr Andrews appeared in person and the respondent did not attend. The tribunal found that South Manny Flavaz Ltd had made an unlawful deduction from Mr Andrews’ wages and ordered the respondent to pay £1,250 gross in respect of that deduction.
The tribunal also recorded that Mr Andrews had accrued but untaken annual leave of 3.5 days. It ordered the respondent to pay £437.50 gross for that leave. The written record does not set out any further findings, legal analysis, or any separate apportionment of the two sums beyond those amounts.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unlawful deduction from the claimant’s wages and ordered payment of £1,250 gross in respect of the amount unlawfully deducted. | Upheld | — | £1,250 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal recorded that the claimant had accrued but untaken annual leave of 3.5 days and ordered the respondent to pay £437.50 gross. The judgment does not separately label this head of award, but it is recorded as payment for accrued leave. | Upheld | — | £438 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,688
- 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.