Case 6006477/2024 · Employment Tribunal
D Earnshaw v Hop Works Brew Co Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 6006477/2024
- Decision date
- 17 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
D Earnshaw
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent did not present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge Phil Allen determined the claim under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013. The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £5,842.72, comprising deductions of £1,814.24 for May 2024, £2,014.24 for June 2024 and £2,014.24 for July 2024. The hearing previously listed on 27 November 2024 was cancelled.
A separate notice attached to the judgment explained that interest under the Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 would accrue from 18 October 2024 at 8% per annum if the award remained unpaid more than 14 days after the relevant decision day of 17 October 2024.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Determined under Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 after the respondent failed to present a valid response on time. Award comprises deductions of £1,814.24 (May 2024), £2,014.24 (June 2024) and £2,014.24 (July 2024). | Upheld | — | £5,843 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £5,843
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.