Case 3321322/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Chowdhury (solicitor) For the v Structural Steel Supplies Ltd (In Liquidation) — 2023
- Case reference
- 3321322/2021
- Decision date
- 1 September 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cowen Appearances
- Venue
- Watford Tribunal
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Chowdhury (solicitor) For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded, for the reasons given orally at the hearing, that the claimant’s claim for automatic unfair dismissal under s.104 ERA 1996 succeeded and that the claim for unlawful deduction from wages under s.13 ERA 1996 also succeeded. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £22,639.04 in total.
The award was stated to comprise £16,499.72 for unfair dismissal and £6,139.32 for unlawful deduction of wages. The tribunal also said that the compensatory award was subject to recoupment, with a prescribed element of £14,467.72 and a prescribed period from 1 October 2021 to 20 July 2023. The balance of £8,171.32 was ordered to be paid immediately to the claimant.
The claimant’s claims for breach of contract and failure to pay outstanding holiday pay were dismissed. The claimant’s application for costs was also dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim succeeded under s.104 ERA 1996 automatic unfair dismissal. | Upheld | — | £16,500 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim succeeded under s.13 ERA 1996. | Upheld | — | £6,139 |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim for failure to pay outstanding holiday pay was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £22,639
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £16,500
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.104 ERA 1996
- s.13 ERA 1996
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.