Case 1306179/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E Williams 1st v Python Performance Limited (In Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) 2nd Respondent: Unbownd Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1306179/2019
- Decision date
- 26 June 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Flood
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E Williams 1st
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the claimant's complaint of unlawful deduction of wages against the 1st respondent was well founded. It related to unpaid wages for five of the months between 1 September 2018 and 31 March 2019, and the tribunal ordered the 1st respondent to pay £10,833.35 gross. The judgment records that the claimant is responsible for any income tax and National Insurance Contributions on that sum.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of three months' notice. It ordered the 1st respondent to pay damages of £6,500 gross for that breach, again subject to the claimant's responsibility for any tax and National Insurance Contributions. The 2nd respondent was dismissed from the proceedings.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim succeeded in relation to unpaid wages for 5 months between 1 September 2018 and 31 March 2019. | Upheld | — | £10,833 |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed in breach of contract in respect of 3 months' notice. | Upheld | — | £6,500 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £17,333
- 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.