Case 3307842/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Hunkin v Pronto Ecom Ltd (Formerly Kemp Electrical Ltd) — 2024
- Case reference
- 3307842/2023
- Decision date
- 12 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Hunkin
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal determined, under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £8,416.00 in respect of that claim.
The tribunal also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract as to notice. It ordered the respondent to pay damages of £8,416.00 for that breach. The judgment records no separate breakdown beyond those two sums, so the total award is £16,832.00.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £8,416.00. | Upheld | — | £8,416 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded damages of £8,416.00. | Upheld | — | £8,416 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £16,832
- 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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.