Case 1300410/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Mitchel Hodges v The Falcon Inn at Woore Ltd — 2025
- Case reference
- 1300410/2025
- Decision date
- 14 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Meichen Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Mitchel Hodges
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was presented in the Midlands West Employment Tribunal on 11 February 2025. The respondent failed to present a valid response on time, and the Employment Judge determined the claim under rule 22 of the Rules of Procedure.
The tribunal found that the respondent had made unauthorised deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £1,050 gross. The tribunal also found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and ordered payment of £2,400 gross.
The judgment requires the respondent to pay the claimant £3,450.00 in total. The judgment was approved by Employment Judge Meichen on 14 August 2025.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment states the respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages and must pay £1050 gross. Determined under rule 22 after respondent failed to present a valid response on time. | Upheld | — | £1,050 |
| Holiday pay | Judgment states the respondent failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement and must pay £2400 gross. Determined under rule 22 after respondent failed to present a valid response on time. | Upheld | — | £2,400 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,450
- 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.