Case 2602085/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Plasted v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 2602085/2022
- Decision date
- 29 February 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr P Plasted
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment issued by Employment Judge M Butler sitting alone at Nottingham on 29 February 2024. The respondent, CES Crane Services Limited (in creditors voluntary liquidation), did not attend the hearing to contest the claims, and the claimant appeared in person.
The Tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £1,200. It further found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £600, and that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement, ordering payment of £30. The total sum payable was recorded as £1,830.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Gross sum ordered for unauthorised deduction from wages. | Upheld | — | £1,200 |
| Breach of contract | Damages for dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £600 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £30 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,830
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 – Rule 21
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.