Case 6002660/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Miss S Thompson v Rum and Spice Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6002660/2025
- Decision date
- 14 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heap
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss S Thompson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss S Thompson presented her claim in the Midlands East Employment Tribunal on 25 January 2025. Rum and Spice Ltd failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Heap stated that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure. The hearing listed for 11 April 2025 was cancelled.
On the papers, the tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £3,630.29 gross. It also ordered payment of £100.00 in respect of expenses not reimbursed to the claimant. The judgment states that the total amount payable was £3,730.29 gross.
The judgment records that the claimant is responsible for any tax due on the gross sum. No separate reasons, evidential findings, or split remedy calculation beyond the two sums awarded are given in the extracted text.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £3,630 |
| Breach of contract | Awarded for expenses not reimbursed; the judgment does not separately label this head of claim, but it is included as a distinct sum in the total award. | Upheld | — | £100 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,730
- 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.