Case 3303651/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person. For the v Brainwave Independence Group — 2021
- Case reference
- 3303651/2020
- Decision date
- 2 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laidler Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person. For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Andrew Morling appeared in person at the hearing at Bury St Edmunds by CVP on 1 June 2021. Brainwave Independence Group did not attend and was not represented.
Employment Judge Laidler ordered the respondent to pay Mr Morling £682. The written judgment states that this sum represented unpaid wages and pay in lieu of notice.
The short written record does not break the award down between those two heads of claim. It also notes that reasons for the judgment had been given orally at the hearing, so no written reasons were provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal ordered payment of a total sum that included unpaid wages. The written judgment does not split the £682 between this head and the pay in lieu of notice head. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal ordered payment of a total sum that included pay in lieu of notice. The written judgment does not split the £682 between this head and the unpaid wages head. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £682
- across all upheld claims
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.