Case 2602181/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Green v EEV management Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 2602181/2022
- Decision date
- 9 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hutchinson Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Green
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was issued on 14 September 2022. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge decided that the claim, or part of it, could properly be determined under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.
The tribunal found that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages, unfairly dismissed the claimant, and failed to pay holiday entitlement. It awarded £1,821.44 gross for wages, £2,742.13 for unfair dismissal, and £18.81 for holiday pay, with a total award of £4,582.38. The recoupment regulations did not apply.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Rule 21 judgment; the judgment records a basic award of £731.50 and compensatory award of £2,010.63, totaling £2,742.13 for unfair dismissal. | Upheld | — | £2,742 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages and must pay £1,821.44 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,821 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and must pay £18.81. | Upheld | — | £19 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,582
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £732
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £2,011
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.