Case 2602262/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Keeling v Sonna Kitchens Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2602262/2022
- Decision date
- 2 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Victoria Butler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Keeling
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr L Keeling presented claims against Sonna Kitchens Limited, and the respondent did not present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge therefore made a determination under rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 on the basis of the material before the tribunal.
The tribunal upheld the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered the respondent to pay £5,594.54 gross. It also upheld the breach of contract claim arising from dismissal in respect of notice, awarding damages of £2,625.
A further claim for unpaid holiday entitlement was upheld, with an award of £1,522.50. The judgment states that the respondent must pay £9,742.04 in total, and the listed hearing on 13 January 2023 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages and awarded £5,594.54 gross. | Upheld | — | £5,595 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £2,625. | Upheld | — | £2,625 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay holiday entitlement and awarded £1,522.50. | Upheld | — | £1,523 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,742
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.