Case 6001293/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Chelsea Shelton v Q Care Assist Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 6001293/2024
- Decision date
- 21 August 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge N Wilson Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Chelsea Shelton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningChelsea Shelton brought complaints against Q Care Assist Limited concerning deductions from wages and notice pay. Employment Judge N Wilson found that the complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages was well founded, identifying an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages in the period 9 February 2024 to 27 February 2024.
The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £756, described as the gross sum deducted. It also recorded that the claimant is responsible for any tax or National Insurance due on that amount.
The separate complaint of breach of contract in relation to notice pay was found not well founded and dismissed.
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 in the period 9 February 2024 to 27 February 2024 and ordered payment of the gross sum deducted. | Upheld | — | £756 |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim relating to notice pay was found not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £756
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.