Case 3313801/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs M Gent-Randall v Bishops Services Limited v — 2022
- Case reference
- 3313801/2020
- Decision date
- 14 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hawksworth
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs M Gent-Randall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing at Reading by CVP on 14 January 2022, Employment Judge Hawksworth sitting alone considered deductions from the claimant's final pay. The tribunal held that the respondent was entitled to deduct £36.00, in part because it related to an overpayment and in part because it was authorised by a relevant contractual provision. On that basis, the claimant's claim for unauthorised deduction in respect of arrears of pay did not succeed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held the respondent was entitled to deduct £36.00 from the claimant's final pay, partly for an overpayment and partly under a contractual provision, so the claim for unauthorised deduction in respect of arrears of pay did not succeed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent was not entitled to deduct accrued but untaken holiday pay from final pay. It found the claimant had 4.8 hours accrued but untaken holiday at termination and ordered payment of £43.20 gross. | Upheld | — | £43 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £43
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.