Case 3314994/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss J Clarke v Creative Care Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3314994/2022
- Decision date
- 26 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge T Brown
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss J Clarke
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss J Clarke’s claims against Creative Care Ltd were heard by Employment Judge T Brown sitting alone in Norwich by Cloud Video Platform on 26 May 2023. The tribunal made no findings on discrimination or dismissal; the judgment is limited to pay-related claims.
The tribunal declared that the claimant had suffered unauthorised deductions from wages. It found that the sums due were £4,189.47 gross for basic pay and £406.80 gross for enhanced pay for bank holiday working, and ordered the respondent to pay those amounts subject to deductions for tax or National Insurance.
The tribunal also ordered the respondent to pay £1,090.89 in respect of annual leave accrued but untaken or unpaid at the termination of employment, again subject to deductions for tax or National Insurance. No separate apportionment of the award beyond the two sums stated in the judgment is given.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal declared that the claimant suffered unauthorised deductions from wages comprising £4,189.47 gross for basic pay and £406.80 gross enhanced pay for bank holiday working. The judgment ordered payment of those sums subject to deductions for tax or National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £4,596 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal ordered payment of £1,090.89 in respect of annual leave accrued but untaken or unpaid at termination, subject to deductions for tax or National Insurance. | Upheld | — | £1,091 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,687
- 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.