Case 6011472/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr l Wolfe v Charles Goodwin — 2025
- Case reference
- 6011472/2025
- Decision date
- 24 April 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Woodhead
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr l Wolfe
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Bristol Employment Tribunal on 24 April 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response in time, and Employment Judge Woodhead determined the claim under Rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £8,475 gross. It further found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice, with damages of £2,000 gross, and that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement, ordering payment of £1,900 gross.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Rule 22 determination after respondent failed to file valid response in time; award stated gross. | Upheld | — | £8,475 |
| Breach of contract | Dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice; damages stated gross. | Upheld | — | £2,000 |
| Holiday pay | Unpaid holiday entitlement; award stated gross. Listed under Working Time Regulations on gov.uk. | Upheld | — | £1,900 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £12,375
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.