Case 6020657/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. A Eze . v Care with Butterflies Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 6020657/2025
- Decision date
- 12 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Heap
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. A Eze .
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Midlands East Employment Tribunal on 3 June 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge decided that a determination could properly be made under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that Care with Butterflies Ltd had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages. It ordered the respondent to pay Mr. A Eze £670.00 net and to account separately to HMRC for tax and national insurance on that sum.
The hearing listed for 26 September 2025 was cancelled.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent did not present a valid response in time. The Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 22 and found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from wages. The respondent was ordered to pay £670.00 net and to account separately to HMRC for tax and national insurance on that sum. | Upheld | — | £670 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £670
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.