Case 2603216/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Rhodes v Isys Care Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2603216/2023
- Decision date
- 10 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge V Butler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Rhodes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Employment Judge V Butler decided that a determination could properly be made of the claim, or part of it, under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from Mrs Rhodes's wages and ordered it to pay £2,523.20 gross. It also found that Mrs Rhodes was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £2,523.20 gross, noting that the net amount must be paid.
The tribunal found that Mrs Rhodes was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £2,327.60. It further found that the respondent failed to pay her holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £988.72. The itemised sums awarded total £8,362.72, although the judgment did not state a separate combined total.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment records unauthorised deductions from wages and orders payment of £2,523.20 gross. | Upheld | — | £2,523 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice and awards damages of £2,523.20 gross, with the net amount to be paid. | Upheld | — | £2,523 |
| Redundancy | The judgment records dismissal by reason of redundancy and entitlement to a redundancy payment of £2,327.60. | Upheld | — | £2,328 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment records failure to pay holiday entitlement and orders payment of £988.72. | Upheld | — | £989 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £8,363
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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.