Case 1304970/2024 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 1304970/2024
- Decision date
- 27 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Perry
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
1 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a final merits hearing in Birmingham on 27 September 2024, before Employment Judge Perry sitting alone, the tribunal recorded a judgment by agreement on the wage complaint. It found that the respondent had made unlawful deductions from the claimant's wages and ordered payment of £3,200 gross for wages for 1 January to 16 February 2024, £190 in statutory guarantee payments, and £31.50 for travel expenses under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
On the disputed termination-related complaints, the tribunal held that the claimant had neither resigned nor been dismissed and therefore remained an employee. On that basis it said it did not currently have jurisdiction to hear his claim for notice pay or holiday pay payable on termination of employment. It also found that the claimant was not made redundant, so it did not currently have jurisdiction to hear the redundancy payment claim.
The claimant withdrew his claim to be compensated for stress, and the tribunal said it did not in any event have jurisdiction to hear that complaint on the basis of the complaints raised before it. It further found that the claimant had been provided with terms of employment under s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996, so that complaint failed. The tribunal made no additional award under s.24(2) Employment Rights Act 1996 because it found no evidenced financial loss beyond the sums ordered.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Judgment by agreement. The tribunal ordered payment of £3,200 gross for wages for 1 January to 16 February 2024, £190 in statutory guarantee payments, and £31.50 for travel expenses under Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Upheld | — | £3,422 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal said the claimant had neither resigned nor been dismissed and therefore remained an employee, so it did not currently have jurisdiction to hear his claim for notice pay or holiday pay payable on termination of employment. It also said no determination was made on any potential complaint about unpaid holiday leave taken. | Other | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found that the claimant was not made redundant and therefore said it did not currently have jurisdiction to hear the redundancy payment claim. | Other | — | — |
| Other | The claimant withdrew his claim to be compensated for stress. The tribunal also said it did not in any event have jurisdiction to hear that complaint on the basis of the complaints raised before it. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal found that the claimant had been provided with terms of his employment pursuant to s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996, so that complaint failed. | Dismissed |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £3,422
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.24(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.1 Employment Rights Act 1996
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.