Case 3320857/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr KL Keeble v HAL Utilities Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3320857/2019
- Decision date
- 30 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Postle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr KL Keeble
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment was issued under Rule 21 and determined the case on the papers. Employment Judge Postle found that HAL Utilities Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr KL Keeble's wages and ordered the respondent to pay £2,290.75 gross.
The tribunal also found that Mr Keeble had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice. Damages for that claim were assessed at £1,050.
In addition, the tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay Mr Keeble's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,155. No other claims or findings are recorded in the judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £2,290.75. | Upheld | — | £2,291 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and ordered damages of £1,050. | Upheld | — | £1,050 |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £1,155. | Upheld | — | £1,155 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,496
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £1,050
- compensatory remedy recorded
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.