Case 3200161/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Benedict v Executive & Business Aviation Support Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3200161/2020
- Decision date
- 3 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Benedict
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at East London Hearing Centre on 3 June 2020 before Employment Judge Russell. The Respondent did not attend and was not represented. The judgment records that the Response had already been dismissed for failure to comply with the Tribunal’s order dated 19 March 2020.
The Tribunal upheld two claims. It found that the Respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the Claimant’s wages in the gross sum of £3,502.92. It also found that the Respondent breached the Claimant’s contract of employment by failing to reimburse the £90 cost of a training course that had been expressly agreed by the Respondent.
The Respondent was ordered to pay the Claimant a total of £3,592.92, reflecting the two sums identified in the judgment. No separate award for interest, injury to feelings, or other heads of loss is recorded in the decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £3,503 |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £90 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,593
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.