Case 4105483/2022 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4105483/2022 Mr C Ralph v The Malacca — 2023
- Case reference
- 4105483/2022
- Decision date
- 5 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hendry Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4105483/2022 Mr C Ralph
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was determined under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to enter a response and did not appear. The Employment Judge decided that liability could properly be determined on the available material without a hearing.
The tribunal upheld the claimant’s complaint of unlawful deduction of wages. It found that the sum due was £472, described as wages for the claimant’s first 30 hours of work and 34 hours of his second week’s work at £10.50 per hour.
The reasons record that the claimant earned £315 for his first week’s work, less £200 that had been advanced to him, and £357 for his second week’s work in June and July 2022. On that basis, the tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £472 to the claimant.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment entered under Rule 21 after the respondent failed to present a response and did not appear. The tribunal determined on the available material that the claimant’s complaint of unlawful deduction of wages succeeded and awarded £472, described as wages for 30 hours in the first week and 34 hours in the second week at £10.50 per hour. The reasons note that the claimant earned £315 for the first week, less £200 advanced to him, and £357 for the second week. | Upheld | — | £472 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £472
- 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.