Case 3202507/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Anukwe v IELTS Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 3202507/2018
- Decision date
- 6 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge John Crosfill
- Venue
- London East
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Anukwe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr G Anukwe brought a claim against IELTS Limited for wages said to be due for teaching work. The respondent said any delay in payment was caused by the claimant's failure to complete timesheets, and it was not disputed that three payments had been made after proceedings began, totalling £3,232 gross. On the material before the tribunal, the remaining dispute appeared to be whether a session lasted one hour or 1.25 hours; if the claimant were right, the amount due would have been £3,600, leaving £368 in issue, apart from any consequential loss which had not been particularised.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claim was pleaded as unlawful deduction from wages under sections 13 and 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and/or a claim for wages under the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. It was struck out under rule 37(1)(c), (d) and (e) after the claimant failed to comply with case management orders and did not attend the hearing. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 37(1)(c), (d) and (e)
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.