Case 3312818/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v D M Saraiya and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 3312818/2022
- Decision date
- 7 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Appearances
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
3 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that, at the material time, Ms Geraldo was employed by the first respondent, Mr Saraiya. Her complaint that the first respondent made unauthorised deductions from her wages was found to be well founded.
The Tribunal ordered the first respondent to pay £409.80 in respect of the unauthorised deductions. It also recorded that, pursuant to s.38 of the Employment Act 2002, the amount of the award was increased by a further £409.80.
The total amount payable by the first respondent to the claimant was therefore £819.60. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal found the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well founded and ordered payment of £409.80 in respect of those deductions. It then increased the amount of the award by a further £409.80 under s.38 of the Employment Act 2002. | Upheld | — | £410 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £820
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.38 of the Employment Act 2002
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.