Case 3312950/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss B F Mitchell v Kate Ellis Catering Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3312950/2022
- Decision date
- 4 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Postle Representation
- Venue
- Norwich
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss B F Mitchell
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment in which the respondent, Kate Ellis Catering LTD, did not enter a response. Employment Judge Postle heard the matter in Norwich on 4 April 2023 and recorded the decision in writing on 4 April 2023.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorized deduction from the claimant's wages. The judgment does not set out any competing response or detailed factual dispute, and written reasons were not provided because reasons had been given orally at the hearing and no request for written reasons was recorded.
The remedy ordered was payment to Miss B F Mitchell of the gross sum of £150. The judgment does not break that amount down into separate heads of loss, and it records no additional award for interest, basic award, compensatory award, or injury to feelings.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 21 judgment. The respondent did not enter a response. The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorized deduction from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £150. | Upheld | — | £150 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £150
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.