Case 3324452/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Ms L Zhang, Director, assisted by Mr J Jackson — 2020
- Case reference
- 3324452/2019
- Decision date
- 9 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hyams
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Hyams, sitting alone at Watford via CVP on 9 July 2020, found that the respondent unlawfully deducted £1,025.63 gross from the claimant's salary for the period 5 August 2019 to 5 September 2019. The judgment records that the deduction was before income tax and national insurance contributions.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant that sum, subject to the deduction of income tax and national insurance contributions by the respondent under regulations 37 and 37A of the Income Tax (Pay As You Earn) Regulations 2003. No other claim, liability issue, or additional remedy is recorded in the judgment text provided.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found an unlawful deduction from the claimant's salary for the period 5 August 2019 to 5 September 2019. The sum was stated as £1,025.63 gross, before income tax and national insurance deductions, and the judgment records that this amount was subject to deductions under regulations 37 and 37A of the Income Tax (Pay As You Earn) Regulations 2003. | Upheld | — | £1,026 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,026
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.