Case 3200250/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Karla Stokes v Absence of Colour Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 3200250/2024
- Decision date
- 17 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Comfort Representatives
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Karla Stokes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Karla Stokes brought a complaint against Absence of Colour Ltd for unauthorised deduction from wages. At the hearing on 14 June 2024 before Employment Judge Comfort Representatives, the respondent was represented by its director, Mr Vishal Schoff, and the claimant appeared in person.
The tribunal held that the complaint was well-founded and succeeded. It found that the respondent had failed to pay wages for the period 1 to 31 October 2023, and that the amount due was £1,367.
The judgment ordered the respondent to pay Ms Stokes the total sum of £1,367 within 14 days of the date the order was sent to the parties. The written record notes that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant's complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages well-founded and ordered payment of unpaid wages for 1-31 October 2023. | Upheld | — | £1,367 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,367
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.