Case 3201316/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Toms v Window Shading Systems Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3201316/2019
- Decision date
- 9 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Toms
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr D Toms brought claims against Window Shading Systems Limited. The respondent did not attend and was not represented. The tribunal upheld the claim of unauthorised deduction from wages and awarded £876.99 for deductions made in February and March 2019.
The tribunal also upheld the claim for breach of contract in respect of one week’s notice and awarded £807.72. The claim for unpaid annual leave on termination succeeded and £988.11 was awarded for that head of claim.
The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed because the Claimant did not have the required period of continuous service. The judgment records a total award of £2,672.82.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal said the claim of unauthorised deduction from wages succeeded and awarded £876.99 for deductions made in February and March 2019. | Upheld | — | £877 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal said the claim for breach of contract in respect of one week’s notice succeeded and awarded £807.72. | Upheld | — | £808 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal said the claim for unpaid annual leave on termination succeeded and awarded £988.11. | Upheld | — | £988 |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the Claimant did not have the required period of continuous service. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,673
- 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.