Case 3302757/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Andrew Mitchell v TRC Care Staffing Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3302757/2023
- Decision date
- 24 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Freshwater Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Andrew Mitchell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing at Bury St Edmunds by CVP on 21 August 2023, before Employment Judge Freshwater, the tribunal considered Andrew Mitchell's claim against TRC Care Staffing Limited for unlawful deduction from wages. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by counsel.
The tribunal held that the claimant's claim under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well-founded and succeeded. No separate findings are recorded in the extracted judgment beyond the tribunal's conclusion that the deduction claim succeeded.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £786.20 net. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal's standard procedure.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant's unlawful deduction from wages claim under section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to be well-founded and ordered payment of £786.20 net. | Upheld | — | £786 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £786
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 23 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.