Case 2600858/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Mitchell Mr C Mitchell v Nocturnal in the East Langton Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2600858/2022
- Decision date
- 8 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brewer Representation
- Venue
- Midlands East Tribunal via CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Mitchell Mr C Mitchell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal allowed the claims for unauthorised deductions from wages brought by Mrs L Mitchell and Mr C Mitchell against Nocturnal in the East Langton Limited. The judgment records that both claims succeeded.
As to remedy, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay Mrs L Mitchell one month's net pay of £1,532.76 and net pay for 3.8 days' accrued untaken holiday as at the date her employment ended. It made the same order for Mr C Mitchell, including one month's net pay of £1,532.76 and net pay for 3.8 days' accrued untaken holiday at termination.
The written record does not set out any further reasoning, a quantified figure for the holiday element, or a single global total award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | For Mrs L Mitchell. The order also included net pay for 3.8 days' accrued untaken holiday as at termination, but the written record does not quantify that element. | Upheld | — | £1,533 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | For Mr C Mitchell. The order also included net pay for 3.8 days' accrued untaken holiday as at termination, but the written record does not quantify that element. | Upheld | — | £1,533 |
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.