Case 4107092/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms G Pruthi v MP Ltd t/a Guidos Proper Fish and Chips — 2024
- Case reference
- 4107092/2023
- Decision date
- 13 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Murphy
- Venue
- Edinburgh Tribunal
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms G Pruthi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was employed by MP10 Ltd t/a Guido’s Proper Fish and Chips as a food server from 17 August to 6 October 2023. She brought a complaint under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 for unpaid wages and a separate complaint about a £20 uniform deposit. The tribunal found that no written contract had been provided, that the claimant was paid by reference to the national minimum wage, and that the respondent’s argument about notice was not relevant to whether the wages due on 9 October 2023 could be withheld.
On the wage claim, the tribunal preferred the respondent’s evidence on the hourly rate and found that the claimant was entitled to £10.42 per hour, not £10.52. It also found that she worked 75 hours and 50 minutes in the material period, after allowing for about 25 minutes lost through lateness, and that £790.15 gross wages were due and unpaid. The tribunal held that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction under s.13 ERA 1996 and ordered payment of the gross sum.
On the separate payment claim, the tribunal found that the respondent had taken £20 from the claimant on or about 17 August 2023 as a uniform deposit. It held that the payment was not authorised by any written contractual term given to the claimant before the payment was made, nor was it an excepted payment under s.16 ERA 1996, so the payment was received in contravention of s.15 ERA 1996. The tribunal ordered repayment of the £20 and, under s.24(2), awarded a further £100 to compensate the claimant for financial loss attributable to the unlawful deduction, namely the additional interest on a loan from her flat mate.
The tribunal made no award for therapy costs and no award for injury to feelings, stating that injury to feelings is not available under s.24(2) and that the therapy costs were not proved on the balance of probabilities to be attributable to the deductions. It also noted that there was no breach of contract claim before it and no jurisdiction to consider any counterclaim for breach of contract.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the claimant worked 75 hours and 50 minutes between 14 September and 6 October 2023 at £10.42 per hour, so £790.15 gross wages were unpaid. It also awarded £100 under s.24(2) ERA 1996 for financial loss attributable to the unlawful deduction. | Upheld | — | £890 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that the respondent unlawfully received £20 from the claimant on or about 17 August 2023 as a uniform deposit in contravention of s.15 ERA 1996 and ordered repayment of that sum. | Upheld | — | £20 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £910
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £100
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
5 references- s.13 ERA 1996
- s.15 ERA 1996
- s.16 ERA 1996
- s.24 ERA 1996
- s.24(2) ERA 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.