Case 3200204/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Skeggs v AFS Laundry Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3200204/2020
- Decision date
- 23 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardiner Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr N Skeggs
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Gardiner sat at East London Hearing Centre by telephone on 22 June 2020. The Respondent did not attend. The Tribunal found that AFS Laundry Limited had made an unauthorised deduction of £175 gross from Mr N Skeggs’ wages, contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The Tribunal also found that, when the proceedings were issued, the Respondent had not complied with the duty under section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to provide the Claimant with a statement of employment particulars. On that basis, it awarded the minimum amount required by section 38(2) of the Employment Act 2002, namely £300 gross, described in the judgment as two weeks’ wages.
The judgment does not divide the £300 award into sub-components beyond identifying it as the statutory minimum under section 38(2). The total sum payable recorded by the judgment is therefore £475 gross, being £175 plus £300.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal found an unauthorised deduction of £175 gross from the Claimant’s wages contrary to section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £175 |
| Other | The Tribunal awarded £300 gross, described as two weeks’ wages, under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 because the Respondent had not complied with the section 1 duty to provide written employment particulars when proceedings were issued. | Upheld | — | £300 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £475
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.38 Employment Act 2002
- s.38(2) Employment Act 2002
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.