Case 3306606/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Dixon v Brooknight Security Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3306606/2021
- Decision date
- 27 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Brown
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Dixon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the claim at Cambridge by Cloud Video Platform on 4 February 2022 before Employment Judge T Brown sitting alone. The claimant appeared in person, and the respondent was not present or represented, though the tribunal took written submissions into account.
The tribunal declared that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in the gross amount of £169 and ordered the respondent to pay that sum, subject to any deductions required by law for tax and National Insurance. The tribunal also found that the claimant's complaint about a separate £140 wage deduction was not well-founded and dismissed that part of the claim.
Reasons were given orally at the hearing. The written judgment records that no written reasons would be provided unless requested by a party within 14 days of the written record being sent.
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 declared that the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages in the gross amount of £169 and ordered payment of £169, subject to lawful tax and National Insurance deductions. | Upheld | — | £169 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaint that a separate deduction of £140 from wages was unauthorised. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £169
- 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.