Case 3302594/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms E Raymond v Future Proof Technology Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 3302594/2024
- Decision date
- 9 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Foxwell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms E Raymond
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the South East Employment Tribunal on 7 June 2024. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £3,692.31 gross. 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 £3,637.20.
In total, the respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £7,329.51. The judgment was approved by Employment Judge Foxwell on 9 June 2025 and sent to the parties on 19 June 2025.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal found respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages; ordered payment of £3,692.31 gross. Determination made under rule 22 after respondent failed to present a valid response. | Upheld | — | £3,692 |
| Breach of contract | Claimant dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice; respondent ordered to pay damages of £3,637.20. | Upheld | — | £3,637 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,330
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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.