Case 3305881/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Elizalde v Bumblebee Education Limited and 1 other — 2023
- Case reference
- 3305881/2022
- Decision date
- 19 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs L Elizalde
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a remote hearing on 8 February 2023 before District Tribunal Judge A Shields sitting alone, the tribunal dealt with a wages claim brought by Mrs L Elizalde against Bumblebee Education Limited and Simplify Umbrella Limited. The claimant did not attend. The first respondent was represented in person by its director, Mr S Hassan, and the second respondent did not attend.
The tribunal held that Bumblebee Education Limited had not made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages, so that part of the claim was dismissed. In relation to Simplify Umbrella Limited, the tribunal found that it had made an unauthorised deduction from wages. It ordered that respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £636.30.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the first respondent had not made an unauthorised deduction from wages. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the second respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £636.30. | Upheld | — | £636 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £636
- 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.