Case 2416520/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Davies v Riverside Creatives Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 2416520/2019
- Decision date
- 16 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Parkin Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Davies
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in which Riverside Creatives Ltd did not present a response. On the information before the Judge, particularly the claimant's email dated 31 March 2020, the tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr M Davies's wages.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay Mr Davies the net sum of £657.94, after deductions for tax, national insurance and NEST pension contribution. The judgment also records that the hearing listed for 28 April 2020 was cancelled.
An interest notice was attached to the judgment. It states that, if the award is not paid within 14 days after the judgment was sent, interest may accrue under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 at the stipulated rate of 8% from 17 April 2020. No separate interest figure was calculated in the judgment itself.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment. The respondent did not present a response; on the information before the Judge, including the claimant's email dated 31 March 2020, the tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £657.94 after deductions for tax, national insurance and NEST pension contribution. | Upheld | — | £658 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £658
- 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.