Case 6003092/2025 · Employment Tribunal
T Ware v Kirstie Lawes t/a Perfectly Polished — 2025
- Case reference
- 6003092/2025
- Decision date
- 29 January 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bax
Parties
2 namedClaimant
T Ware
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Bristol Employment Tribunal on 29 January 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure that a determination could properly be made of the claim or part of it.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,092.55 gross. It further found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, with damages of £330.86 awarded, and that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement, with £397.02 gross awarded.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £1,820.43 in total. The judgment was approved by Employment Judge Bax and sent to the parties on 13 January 2026. No unfair dismissal claim was adjudicated in the text provided despite the gov.uk listing categorisation.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages; respondent ordered to pay £1,092.55 gross. | Upheld | — | £1,093 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages of £330.86 awarded. | Upheld | — | £331 |
| Holiday pay | Respondent failed to pay holiday entitlement; £397.02 gross awarded. | Upheld | — | £397 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,820
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure
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.