Case 3303375/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Wood v Kerria Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3303375/2020
- Decision date
- 4 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Wood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningUnder Rule 21 (claim not contested), the tribunal recorded that Kerria Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr D Wood’s wages and ordered payment of £11,828.19 net. It also found that he had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £5,769.23 in damages.
The tribunal further ordered £1,702.79 in respect of expenses and £540.41 for unpaid holiday entitlement. The judgment contains no separate reasoning beyond the Rule 21 default and no apportionment beyond the four sums ordered, which total £19,840.62.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 (claim not contested); the tribunal ordered payment of the net sum. | Upheld | — | £11,828 |
| Wrongful dismissal | Rule 21 (claim not contested); damages awarded in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £5,769 |
| Other | Award made in respect of expenses; the short judgment does not identify a separate legal label for this item. | Upheld | — | £1,703 |
| Holiday pay | Rule 21 (claim not contested); the tribunal found unpaid holiday entitlement. | Upheld | — | £540 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £19,841
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 (claim not contested)
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.