Case 6043315/2025 · Employment Tribunal
T Mawdsley v Intesa Communications Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 6043315/2025
- Decision date
- 20 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
T Mawdsley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIntesa Communications Ltd did not present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge decided that the claims could properly be determined under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The Tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from T Mawdsley’s wages and ordered payment of £390.72 gross, calculated as four days of eight hours at £12.21 per hour. It also found that the claimant had been dismissed in breach of contract in respect of notice and awarded £488.40 for five days’ contractual notice, calculated using gross pay because of the likelihood that tax would be payable as Post Employment Notice Pay. The total award was £879.12. The notice accompanying the judgment stated that interest would accrue at 8% per annum if the award remained wholly or partly unpaid beyond the applicable 14-day period; no fixed interest sum was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £391 |
| Wrongful dismissal | The judgment describes this as dismissal in breach of contract in respect of notice. | Upheld | — | £488 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £879
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.