Claimant v R Townhouse Ltd t/a Raffles Chelsea
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the Respondent made a series of unauthorised deductions from the Claimant's wages from 8 March 2024 in respect of wages due between 26 February and 3 December 2024. The Claimant was entitled to payment for this period but did not receive it.
The tribunal found that the Respondent victimised the Claimant by stopping her wages from 8 March 2024, which constituted a detriment because of a protected act. However, the complaint of victimisation relating to Mr Cena was dismissed as the tribunal did not find that aspect of the claim established.
Facts
The Claimant worked for the Respondent, a hospitality business operating as Raffles Chelsea. From 8 March 2024, the Respondent stopped paying the Claimant her wages for work performed between 26 February and 3 December 2024. The Claimant brought claims for unlawful deduction of wages and victimisation, alleging that the stoppage of her wages was an act of victimisation related to a protected act. There was also a separate victimisation complaint relating to an individual named Mr Cena.
Decision
The tribunal upheld the Claimant's complaint of unlawful deduction of wages, finding that the Respondent had made unauthorised deductions from 8 March 2024. The tribunal also found that the stoppage of wages constituted victimisation under the Equality Act. However, the victimisation complaint relating to Mr Cena was dismissed. The Claimant was awarded £50,321.58 including unpaid wages, injury to feelings, interest, and grossing up for tax.
Practical note
An employer's decision to stop paying wages can constitute both an unlawful deduction of wages and an act of victimisation if linked to a protected act, resulting in both financial loss compensation and injury to feelings awards.
Award breakdown
Vento band: lower
Case details
- Case number
- 2219355/2024
- Decision date
- 5 June 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No