Case 3314745/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Arpita Ghosal v Maybourne Care Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3314745/2022
- Decision date
- 13 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hay
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Arpita Ghosal
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs Arpita Ghosal brought a claim against Maybourne Care Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) for unlawful deduction from wages. The case was heard by Employment Judge Hay sitting alone at Bury St Edmunds via CVP on 1 August 2023. The respondent did not attend.
The tribunal upheld the claim. It found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant and that this amounted to an unlawful deduction from wages. The judgment records that the respondent’s name was amended to reflect that it was in voluntary liquidation.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant the gross sum of £3,000 in respect of the sum unlawfully deducted. No separate award components or additional remedies were recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that, by failing to pay the claimant, the respondent had made an unlawful deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £3,000. | Upheld | — | £3,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,000
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.