Case 6021957/2025 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Ms H Fernandes, Director — 2026
- Case reference
- 6021957/2025
- Decision date
- 9 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan Appearances
- Venue
- Cambridge
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Employment Tribunal, sitting at Cambridge before Employment Judge Tynan on 9 February 2026, considered a claim by Ms Karen Bain against Lozi Ltd. The Claimant appeared in person and the Respondent was represented by Ms H Fernandes, Director.
The Tribunal found that the Respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the Claimant's wages and ordered the Respondent to pay the Claimant the sum of £324.42 in respect of those deductions. Reasons were given orally at the hearing; written reasons will not be provided unless requested in accordance with the standard 14-day procedure.
The written record does not address any working time or other claim referenced in the gov.uk listing categories, and no further findings, legal tests, or remedy components are set out in the judgment text.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment states the Respondent made unauthorised deductions from the Claimant's wages and is ordered to pay £324.42 in respect of the deductions. | Upheld | — | £324 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £324
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.