Case 3322552/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Henry, Counsel. For the v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 3322552/2021
- Decision date
- 14 August 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge L Brown Members
- Venue
- Cambridge
- Panel members
- Mrs Smith, Mr Holford
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr Henry, Counsel. For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case at Cambridge on 26 to 28 June 2023 before Employment Judge L Brown, with members Mrs Smith and Mr Holford. The Claimant was represented by Mr Henry, Counsel, and the Respondent by Mr Platts-Mills, Counsel. Written reasons were not provided because reasons had been given orally at the hearing.
The tribunal dismissed the Claimant’s complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages contrary to s.13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It also dismissed the complaint that the Respondent failed in its duty under s.20 and s.21 of the Equality Act 2010 to make reasonable adjustments, recording that those complaints were not well founded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Complaint under s.13 Employment Rights Act 1996 dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint that the Respondent failed, contrary to s.20 and s.21 Equality Act 2010, to make reasonable adjustments was found not well founded and dismissed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.