Case 3200548/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr John Burke v Care Trusters Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 3200548/2024
- Decision date
- 15 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Beyzade Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr John Burke
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a Rule 21 default hearing on 15 November 2024 before Employment Judge B Beyzade, the respondent did not present a response and was not represented. The tribunal therefore determined the claim in default on the material before it.
The tribunal held that Care Trusters Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr John Burke's wages in respect of wage arrears and ordered payment of £3,750, subject to any required deductions for tax and national insurance. It also ordered the respondent to pay £1,286 under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars in accordance with section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
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 from wages in respect of wage arrears and ordered payment of £3,750, subject to any required deductions for tax and national insurance. | Upheld | — | £3,750 |
| Other | The tribunal ordered payment of £1,286 under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide a written statement of employment particulars in accordance with section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £1,286 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,036
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- Rule 21
- section 38 Employment Act 2002
- section 1 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.