Case 2500863/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss R Teasdale v John Stirk — 2023
- Case reference
- 2500863/2023
- Decision date
- 26 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Arullendran Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss R Teasdale
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss R Teasdale presented a claim on 5 May 2023 for unpaid wages in the sum of £500. The respondent, John Stirk, was required to file a response by 22 June 2023 but did not do so.
The tribunal entered judgment on liability and remedy under Rule 21 on the basis of the information in the ET1. It held that the claimant’s claim for an unauthorised deduction of wages under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well-founded and succeeded.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £500 gross, subject to any statutory deduction the respondent may be obliged to make. No separate award components were identified beyond that sum.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim was for unpaid wages of £500 under section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996. The respondent did not file a response, and judgment was entered under Rule 21 on the basis of the ET1. | Upheld | — | £500 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £500
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Rule 21 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.