Case 3323587/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Javeria Nasir v Connect Care and Support Ltd (t/a Encore Health and Coghlan Lodges) — 2020
- Case reference
- 3323587/2019
- Decision date
- 18 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Michell
- Venue
- Bury St Edmunds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Javeria Nasir
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Michell sat alone at Bury St Edmunds on 18 December 2020. The claimant, Mrs Javeria Nasir, appeared in person and the respondent was represented by its director, Miss Melissa Mupandasekwa.
The tribunal found that the claimant's complaint that the respondent had made a deduction from her wages in contravention of section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well founded. No further factual reasoning is set out in the written record beyond that finding.
The tribunal ordered the respondent, Connect Care & Support Limited, to pay the claimant £903.52. No separate remedy breakdown, interest award, or additional claims are recorded in the decision.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the claimant's complaint under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was well founded and ordered payment of £903.52. | Upheld | — | £904 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £904
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 13 Employment Rights Act 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.