Case 3207448/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss H Govan v Education Dreams Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3207448/2021
- Decision date
- 17 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Representation Claimant
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss H Govan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss H Govan brought a claim for unlawful deduction from wages against Education Dreams Limited. The respondent did not attend the hearing and submitted no ET3. The claimant set out the work she had done in June and July 2021 for which she had not been paid, and the tribunal accepted that the unpaid wages totalled £1,879 gross.
Tribunal Judge D Brannan found that the failure to pay those wages was an unauthorised deduction within section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, with the claim being justiciable under section 23. The tribunal held that the claim was well founded and ordered the respondent to pay £1,879 gross pursuant to section 24, with the claimant responsible for tax and national insurance on that sum.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claim under section 13 ERA 1996 well founded and ordered payment of £1,879 gross. The respondent did not attend and filed no ET3. | Upheld | — | £1,879 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,879
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.23 ERA 1996
- s.24 ERA 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.