Case 3328225/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Masters v Coghlan Lodges Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 3328225/2019
- Decision date
- 4 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Masters
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a Rule 21 judgment dated 4 March 2020. Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto found that Coghlan Lodges Limited had made an unauthorised deduction from Mr J Masters's wages. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £600 gross in respect of that deduction, with the judgment stating that payment of the net amount would satisfy the debt if the respondent paid the related tax and national insurance to HMRC.
The tribunal also upheld Mr Masters's claim for damages for breach of contract in respect of expenses, described in the judgment as travel expenses and food, and ordered payment of £250. In addition, the tribunal ordered a further £65 to compensate financial loss sustained as a result of the unauthorised deduction, pursuant to section 24(2) Employment Rights Act 1996. The total monetary sum recorded in the judgment is £915.
Claims and outcomes
2 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 £600 gross plus a further £65 under section 24(2) Employment Rights Act 1996 for financial loss caused by the deduction. | Upheld | — | £665 |
| Breach of contract | The claimant's breach of contract claim for expenses succeeded; the award was described as travel expenses and food. | Upheld | — | £250 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £915
- 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.