Case 3300116/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Guy Hewson v Tony Rayne Dibbens v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 3300116/2024
- Decision date
- 8 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge JUDGMENT
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr Guy Hewson v Tony Rayne Dibbens
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was determined on the papers by Employment Judge M Warren after the time for presenting a response had expired and no valid response had been presented. The judgment was based on the information before the Employment Judge.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £828. The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, and ordered the respondent to pay damages of £920.
The judgment recorded, for the avoidance of doubt, that the total payable by the respondent to the claimant under the terms of the judgment, without deduction and taxable in the hands of the claimant, was £1,748.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered the respondent to pay the gross sum of £828. | Upheld | — | £828 |
| Breach of contract | Claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice; respondent ordered to pay damages of £920. | Upheld | — | £920 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,748
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.