Case 2603223/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Harriman v Isys Care Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 2603223/2023
- Decision date
- 10 February 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge V Butler
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Harriman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not 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 C Harriman's wages and ordered payment of £882.00 gross. It also found that she was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £2,646.00 gross, with the net amount to be paid.
The tribunal further found that Mrs Harriman was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment of £4,299.75. It also found that the respondent had failed to pay her holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £661.50.
The judgment records that the claim succeeds and that the remedy to which the claimant is entitled will be determined at a remedy hearing, although it separately states the monetary sums payable for wages, notice, redundancy payment and holiday entitlement. No aggregate total, interest, basic award, compensatory award or injury to feelings award is stated.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states that the respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages and must pay £882.00 gross. | Upheld | — | £882 |
| Breach of contract | The judgment states that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awards £2,646.00 gross, with the net amount to be paid. | Upheld | — | £2,646 |
| Redundancy | The judgment states that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and is entitled to a redundancy payment. | Upheld | — | £4,300 |
| Holiday pay | The judgment states that the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £662 |
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.