Case 3302790/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Hlabano v Brisk Logistics Ltd (Debarred) — 2022
- Case reference
- 3302790/2021
- Decision date
- 19 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Hlabano
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge R Lewis, sitting at Watford by video on 6 January 2022, determined the claim on the papers because the respondent did not participate and the claimant provided written representations. The tribunal found that Mr R Hlabano was a worker for Brisk Logistics Ltd within the meaning of s.230(1)(3)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996.
On that basis, the tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant’s pay. The judgment does not set out a separate calculation exercise beyond the sum awarded, but it records that the respondent was ordered to pay £720.00 in respect of unauthorised deductions.
No discrimination, dismissal, redundancy, whistleblowing, or other claims were recorded in the judgment. The only substantive finding was the unlawful deduction from wages claim, which succeeded in full for the amount awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £720 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £720
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.230(1)(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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.