Case 2502518/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Higgins v Connect Facilities Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 2502518/2019
- Decision date
- 13 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G Johnson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Higgins
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis Rule 21 judgment was signed by Employment Judge G Johnson on 13 December 2019. The tribunal found that Connect Facilities Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr M Higgins's wages and ordered it to pay £2,045.00.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £576.92. It further found that the respondent had breached the contract of employment by failing to pay the claimant's expenses and ordered payment of £195.00.
The hearing listed for 3 January 2020 was cancelled. The total award recorded by the judgment was £2,816.92.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £2,045.00. | Upheld | — | £2,045 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £576.92. | Upheld | — | £577 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found that the respondent breached the claimant's contract of employment by failing to pay the claimant's expenses and ordered payment of £195.00. | Upheld | — | £195 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,817
- 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.