Case 6015017/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Claire Keating v Inflyter UK Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6015017/2024
- Decision date
- 20 March 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge N Wilson Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claire Keating
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningClaire Keating presented the claim on 14 October 2024. The respondent did not present a valid response on time, despite service at its registered office on two occasions, and did not attend the hearing on 25 February 2025. Employment Judge N Wilson proceeded under Rule 22 of the ET Rules of Procedure 2024 after hearing evidence from the claimant.
The tribunal held that the claimant's claim for unauthorised deduction of wages under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 succeeded. It found that two months of salary remained unpaid, covering July 2024 and August 2024 at £3,750 gross per month, making £7,500 gross in unpaid wages.
The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday pay entitlement, which was due in the August 2024 wages and amounted to £2,423.08 gross. The respondent was ordered to pay £9,923.08 gross in total. The judgment also recorded that, based on the payslips for the unpaid months, the net amount due after tax, national insurance and pension contributions was £7,453.60.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The award comprised £7,500 gross for unpaid salary for July and August 2024 (£3,750 gross per month) and £2,423.08 gross for unpaid holiday pay due in the August 2024 wages. The judgment also recorded a net amount due of £7,453.60 after deductions. | Upheld | — | £9,923 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £9,923
- 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.