Case 6016469/2025 · Employment Tribunal
N Thomas v Clockworks Steakhouse Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6016469/2025
- Decision date
- 10 October 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge KM Ross
Parties
2 namedClaimant
N Thomas
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and Employment Judge KM Ross determined the claim under rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024. The written judgment is dated 4 September 2025 and records that the hearing listed for 15 September 2025 was cancelled.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made an unauthorised deduction from the claimant's wages. It ordered Clockworks Steakhouse Ltd to pay N Thomas the gross sum of £251.55, calculated as 29.25 hours worked between 20 and 30 March 2025 at £8.60 per hour, described in the judgment as the national minimum wage at that time for a worker aged 18-20 years.
The notice on interest states that interest is payable on awards of money, that no interest is payable if the sum is paid within 14 days after the written record was sent, and that the relevant decision day was 10 October 2025 with a calculation day of 11 October 2025 at a stipulated rate of 8% per annum. The judgment does not state a separate quantified interest amount.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states the respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages and ordered payment of the gross sum of £251.55. | Upheld | — | £252 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £252
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- rule 22 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
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.