Case 3304478/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss U Latif v Priestley bakers Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 3304478/2024
- Decision date
- 11 June 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Anstis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss U Latif
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Anstis stated that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure. In that judgment, the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was struck out, and no remedy was awarded on that claim.
The tribunal upheld the claimant's claim for unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered Priestley Bakers Ltd to pay £1,441 gross. It also upheld the breach of contract claim arising from notice and awarded £400 in damages. The total award was £1,841.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim in the rule 22 judgment. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages and ordered payment of £1,441 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,441 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £400 in damages. | Upheld | — | £400 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,841
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.