Case 3309713/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. G. Deane - Counsel For the v Ms. E. Cho – Litigation Consultant — 2025
- Case reference
- 3309713/2023
- Decision date
- 15 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Grahame Anderson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. G. Deane - Counsel For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing at Cambridge via CVP on 15 January 2025, Employment Judge Grahame Anderson gave an oral judgment in favour of the claimant, Memory Mathangi, against Oasia Private Care Limited. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages and had also been in breach of contract.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant £5,302.50 gross. The judgment states that the claimant is responsible for any national insurance or tax due on that sum.
No written reasons were provided in the record because the judgment was given orally at the hearing, and the note on the decision states that written reasons would only be provided if requested in time.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,303
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.