Case 3328303/2017 · Employment Tribunal

Employment tribunal upholds unlawful-deduction-from-wages claim against Home Proud UK Ltd

The tribunal found the claimant's claim for arrears of pay well founded. The judgment does not quantify the arrears and says the matter will be set down for a hearing to determine remedy.

Tribunal Watch · Published 27 April 2026

Case reference: 3328303/2017
Decision date: 27 April 2026
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Henry

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss C Murray

Respondent

Home Proud UK Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a Rule 21 judgment after the respondent failed to enter a response. The tribunal found the claimant's claim for arrears of pay well founded. The judgment does not quantify the arrears and says the matter will be set down for a hearing to determine remedy.

The tribunal also recorded that the claimant did not have sufficient length of service to claim unfair dismissal, so that claim did not succeed. No discrimination, whistleblowing, or other claims are identified in the judgment text provided.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	The tribunal found the claimant's claim for arrears of pay well founded under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a response. The judgment does not fix the amount; it states the matter will be listed for a remedy hearing.	Upheld	—	—
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal said the claimant did not have sufficient length of service to claim unfair dismissal.	Dismissed	—	—

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.