Case 3302636/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Emily May Gregg v Lucy Rose Smith — 2025
- Case reference
- 3302636/2025
- Decision date
- 16 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harrison Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Emily May Gregg
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal declared that the claimant was a worker of the respondent at the relevant time within the meaning of section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was found to be well-founded. The Tribunal found that the respondent made unlawful deductions from the claimant's pay in January 2025 (£306) and February 2025 (£50).
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant the gross sum of £356.00. Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and written reasons will not be provided unless requested within the prescribed period.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unauthorised deductions in January 2025 (£306) and February 2025 (£50); respondent ordered to pay gross sum of £356.00. | Upheld | — | £356 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £356
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 230(3)(b) Employment Rights Act 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.