Case 1303756/2019 · Employment Tribunal
in person v Mr J Powell — 2020
- Case reference
- 1303756/2019
- Decision date
- 2 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Broughton Appearances
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
in person
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr C Hull appeared in person at Birmingham on 2 April 2020. Mr J Powell did not file a response, attend the hearing, or otherwise engage in the tribunal process. In that absence, Employment Judge Broughton accepted the claimant's representations and held that the claims for unlawful deduction from wages for the months leading up to February 2019 and for breach of contract arising from early termination of the apprenticeship contract succeeded.
The tribunal also recorded that the claimant had not been provided with a statement of terms of employment. It then awarded £1,750 for unpaid wages, £5,120 for breach of contract, and £600 described as 'no contract' and calculated as four weeks' pay. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found unlawful deduction from wages for the months leading up to February 2019. | Upheld | — | £1,750 |
| Breach of contract | The breach of contract claim related to early termination of the claimant's apprenticeship contract. | Upheld | — | £5,120 |
| Other | The judgment records that the claimant had not been provided with a statement of terms of employment and awards 'no contract' equivalent to four weeks' pay. | Upheld | — | £600 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,470
- 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.