Mr D White v Meddo Limited — 2020

Case reference: 2603561/2019
Decision date: 17 March 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Hutchinson Date

Indexed: 19 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr D White

Respondent

Meddo Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

In a Rule 21 judgment, the tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the net sum of £3,107.08.

The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. It awarded damages of £323.54 for that claim.

The tribunal further found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement. It ordered payment of £323.54 for that claim.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	Rule 21 judgment states the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the net sum of £3,107.08.	Upheld	—	£3,107
Breach of contract	Judgment states the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awards damages of £323.54.	Upheld	—	£324
Holiday pay	Judgment states the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and awards £323.54.	Upheld	—	£324

Remedy

Monetary award

Total award: £3,754; across all upheld claims

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.