Case 2415100/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Miss C Tsang v Lend Logic Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2415100/2019
- Decision date
- 11 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss C Tsang
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was entered under Rule 21. The tribunal found that Lend Logic Ltd had made an unauthorised deduction from Miss C Tsang's wages and ordered the respondent to pay £1,608.14 gross.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had not given Miss Tsang a statement of employment particulars and ordered payment of £769.24 gross. A separate notice states that interest under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 would apply if the sums were not paid within 14 days after the relevant decision day, with 11 March 2020 identified as the relevant decision day and 8% as the stipulated rate.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,608 |
| Other | The judgment states that the respondent did not give the claimant a statement of employment particulars; it does not expressly label this as breach of contract or identify any more specific claim type in the extracted text. | Upheld | — | £769 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,377
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, Rule 21
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.