Case 2501664/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Angela Drayton v Secret Garden Cafe (Hull) Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2501664/2024
- Decision date
- 2 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Robertson Representation
- Venue
- Newcastle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Angela Drayton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that the claimant's complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well-founded. It found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction in respect of the period worked between 27 April and 12 June 2024 inclusive, and ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £2,082.08, described as the gross sum deducted. The judgment also records that the claimant is responsible for any tax or National Insurance due on that amount.
The tribunal further found that, when the proceedings began, the respondent was in breach of its duty to provide the claimant with a written statement of employment particulars. It stated that there were no exceptional circumstances making an award equivalent to two weeks' gross pay unjust or inequitable, and that it was not just and equitable to make an award equivalent to four weeks' gross pay. Applying section 38 of the Employment Act 2002, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £572.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages for the period worked between 27 April and 12 June 2024 inclusive and ordered payment of the gross sum deducted. | Upheld | — | £2,082 |
| Other | The tribunal found that, when proceedings began, the respondent was in breach of its duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars and made an award under section 38 Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £572 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,654
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 38 Employment Act 2002
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.