Miss R Lee v Mr Darren Felber and others: 1404029/2018
JUDGMENT
[1]The claimant’s claim for unlawful deduction from wages succeeds as against the third respondent; and[2]The appropriate remedy will be determined at the hearing already listed on 8 March 2019. ________________________ Employment Judge N J Roper Dated 14 January 2019 Case No 1404029/2018 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant Miss R Lee Respondent Mr Darren Felber(1) Mr Darren Hempson(2) Felber Commercial Services Limited(3) Heard at: Exeter On: 3 June 2019 Before: Employment Judge Goraj Representation Claimant: in person The Respondents no responses entered and did not attend[1]Following the liability Judgment against the third respondent, which was issued on 24 January 2019, the claimant is awarded compensation against the third respondent as recorded below.[2]The third respondent has made unlawful deductions from the claimant’s pay in the total sum of £848.70 gross (115 hours at £7.38 per hour) in breach of section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 which sum the third respondent is ordered to pay to the claimant.[3]The third respondent is also ordered to pay to the claimant costs (by way of a preparation time order) pursuant to Rules 76 and 78 of the Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013) in the sum of £304 (8 hours x £38 per hour).[4]The third respondent is therefore ordered to pay to the claimant the total sum of £1,152.70 gross. ________________________ Employment Judge Goraj Date: 6 June 2019 Case No 1404029/2018 As reasons for the Judgment were announced orally at the Hearing written reasons shall not be provided unless they are requested by a party within 14 days of the sending of this Judgment to the parties. Online publication of judgments and reasons The Employment Tribunal (ET) is required to maintain a register of all judgments and written reasons. The register must be accessible to the public. It has recently been moved online. All judgments and reasons since February 2017 are now available at: https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions The ET has no power to refuse to place a judgment or reasons on the online register, or to remove a judgment or reasons from the register once they have been placed there. If you consider that these documents should be anonymised in anyway prior to publication, you will need to apply to the ET for an order to that effect under Rule 50 of the ET’s Rules of Procedure. Such an application would need to be copied to all other parties for comment and it would be carefully scrutinised by a judge (where appropriate, with panel members) before deciding whether (and to what extent) anonymity should be granted to a party or a witness